vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of KKR Real Estate Finance Trust Inc. (KREF) and Orchestra BioMed Holdings, Inc. (OBIO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Orchestra BioMed Holdings, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($30.9M vs $25.8M, roughly 1.2× KKR Real Estate Finance Trust Inc.). Orchestra BioMed Holdings, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 20.2% vs -101.7%, a 121.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Orchestra BioMed Holdings, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (12120.2% vs -26.6%).
KKR Real Estate Finance Trust Inc. is a specialized real estate finance firm sponsored by global investment firm KKR. It primarily originates, acquires, and manages a portfolio of senior secured commercial real estate loans, mostly backed by high-quality institutional commercial properties across the United States, delivering stable risk-adjusted returns to investors via interest income from its diversified assets.
Orchestra BioMed Holdings, Inc. is a clinical-stage medical technology company focused on developing novel, evidence-based therapeutic solutions for cardiovascular and other high-burden chronic diseases. It collaborates with leading healthcare stakeholders, operates primarily across North American and European markets, with core segments covering interventional cardiology and chronic disease care optimization.
KREF vs OBIO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $25.8M | $30.9M |
| Net Profit | $-26.2M | $6.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | 99.8% |
| Operating Margin | -105.1% | 21.8% |
| Net Margin | -101.7% | 20.2% |
| Revenue YoY | -26.6% | 12120.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -229.6% | 138.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.49 | $0.28 |
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 | $25.8M | $30.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $25.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $30.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $31.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $35.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $37.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $40.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $39.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-26.2M | $6.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-29.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-4.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $20.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-7.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.8M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-3.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 99.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -105.1% | 21.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 50.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -101.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -18.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 55.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -19.6% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 63.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -8.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | -101.7% | 20.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 54.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -98.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -15.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 57.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -20.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 63.9% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -7.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | $-0.49 | $0.28 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.12 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.53 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.15 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.22 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.19 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.29 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.13 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $84.6M | $106.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $15.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.2B | $53.6M |
| Total Assets | $6.5B | $114.9M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.28× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $84.6M | $106.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $204.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $107.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $106.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $104.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $108.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $107.2M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $106.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $15.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $53.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4B | — |
| Q4 25 | $6.5B | $114.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.5B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.8B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.6B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.4B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.8B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.1B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.3B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.28× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $72.3M | $-2.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-2.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -7.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | -0.36× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $72.3M | $-2.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $21.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $15.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $132.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $49.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $30.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $34.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $-2.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -7.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.36× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.34× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 6.54× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.19× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
