vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of iSpecimen Inc. (ISPC) and Serve Robotics Inc. (SERV). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Serve Robotics Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($881.5K vs $713.1K, roughly 1.2× iSpecimen Inc.). iSpecimen Inc. runs the higher net margin — -146.9% vs -3888.1%, a 3741.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Serve Robotics Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (400.1% vs -75.1%). Over the past eight quarters, Serve Robotics Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (-3.5% CAGR vs -49.3%).
Specimen Products is a Chicago-based manufacturer of custom guitars, tube amplifiers, and audio horn speakers led by luthier Ian Schneller. Specimen Products also offers courses in guitar and tube amplifier design, construction, and repair through their Chicago School of Guitar Making. The Specimen workshop offers repair services to the general public, making use of their collection of parts from rare and vintage manufacturers.
Ecovacs Robotics is a Chinese technology company. It is best known for developing in-home robotic appliances. The company was founded in 1998 by Qian Dongqi and is headquartered in Suzhou, China. According to Global Asia, Ecovacs Robotics had more than 60% of the Chinese market for robots by 2013. In 2023, Nikkei Asia had reported that the market capitalisation of Ecovacs Robotics has grown to near $6.38 billion, which is "roughly 5 times" that of the market capitalisation of rivalling US bas...
ISPC vs SERV — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $713.1K | $881.5K |
| Net Profit | $-1.0M | $-34.3M |
| Gross Margin | 44.4% | -757.3% |
| Operating Margin | -255.4% | -4572.1% |
| Net Margin | -146.9% | -3888.1% |
| Revenue YoY | -75.1% | 400.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 50.3% | -161.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.42 | $-0.50 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | — | $881.5K | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $687.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $713.1K | $642.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1M | $440.5K | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5M | $176.3K | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.7M | $222.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.9M | $468.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.3M | $946.7K |
| Q4 25 | — | $-34.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-33.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.0M | $-20.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.7M | $-13.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-6.0M | $-13.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.4M | $-8.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-2.1M | $-9.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.9M | $-9.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | -757.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -637.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 44.4% | -445.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 42.4% | -333.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.5% | -371.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 43.4% | -70.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 51.9% | 30.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 58.4% | 62.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | -4572.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -5067.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -255.4% | -3527.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -154.9% | -3406.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -395.8% | -7701.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -64.1% | -3804.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | -76.2% | -1828.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -131.0% | -814.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | -3888.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -4806.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -146.9% | -3247.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -156.8% | -3000.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -409.8% | -7441.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -54.1% | -3601.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -73.6% | -1931.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -126.7% | -954.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.50 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.54 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.42 | $-0.36 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.71 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-5.40 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.10 | $-0.20 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-3.72 | $-0.27 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-6.36 | $-0.37 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $106.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $622.0K | $350.7M |
| Total Assets | $6.0M | $367.8M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $106.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $116.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $116.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $197.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9M | $123.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8M | $50.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2M | $28.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $350.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $283.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $622.0K | $207.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7M | $210.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.3M | $131.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.7M | $56.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.1M | $28.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.8M | $-8.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $367.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $299.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.0M | $214.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.8M | $216.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.4M | $139.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.3M | $61.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.9M | $32.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $12.5M | $4.2M |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $-192.2K | $-29.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-46.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -5234.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1872.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-117.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $-29.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-25.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-192.2K | $-16.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.1M | $-9.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-3.6M | $-6.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.1M | $-5.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.5M | $-5.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.1M | $-4.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-46.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-36.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-22.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-12.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-3.6M | $-11.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.1M | $-10.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-6.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.1M | $-4.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | -5234.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -5314.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -3426.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -2934.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -242.7% | -6307.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -41.1% | -4529.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -1396.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -90.9% | -431.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1872.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1649.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 940.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 785.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.5% | 2755.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.5% | 2070.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.0% | 169.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.4% | 0.4% |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
