vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Kestrel Group Ltd (KG) and Recon Technology, Ltd (RCON). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Kestrel Group Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($17.4M vs $12.2M, roughly 1.4× Recon Technology, Ltd). Recon Technology, Ltd runs the higher net margin — -6.8% vs -29.0%, a 22.1% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Kestrel is an American bicycle brand which specialized in high-end bikes for triathlons and road racing.
Recon Instruments Inc. was a Canadian technology company that produced smartglasses and wearable displays marketed by the company as "heads-up displays" for sports. Recon's products delivered live activity metrics, GPS maps, and notifications directly to the user's eye. Recon's first heads-up display offering was released commercially in October 2010, roughly a year and a half before Google introduced Google Glass.
KG vs RCON — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $17.4M | $12.2M |
| Net Profit | $-5.1M | $-832.7K |
| Gross Margin | — | 33.5% |
| Operating Margin | -23.3% | -14.6% |
| Net Margin | -29.0% | -6.8% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 111.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 70.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.65 | $-0.09 |
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 | — | $12.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $17.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $5.8M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $6.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-832.7K | ||
| Q3 25 | $-5.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $69.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-2.8M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-3.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 33.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 31.7% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | 26.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | -14.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -23.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -63.9% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -50.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | -6.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -29.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1258.8% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -48.9% | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -49.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.09 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.65 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.05 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.31 | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-1.16 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $12.9M | $10.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $174.1M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $143.8M | $66.4M |
| Total Assets | $1.1B | $77.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.21× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $10.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $19.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $19.9M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $36.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $174.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $173.8M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $66.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $143.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $150.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $66.9M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $60.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | $77.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $74.2M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $68.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.21× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.16× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — |
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 | $-9.7M | $-1.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $-1.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-9.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-20.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-1.7M | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-931.0K |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.30× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
