vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Laird Superfood, Inc. (LSF) and Ucommune International Ltd (UK). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Ucommune International Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($16.4M vs $13.3M, roughly 1.2× Laird Superfood, Inc.). Laird Superfood, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -13.2% vs -42.2%, a 29.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Laird Superfood, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (15.0% vs -56.1%).
Laird Superfood, Inc. develops, manufactures and sells a portfolio of plant-based functional superfood products, including premium coffee creamers, hydration blends, nutritional supplements, and plant-powered snacks. It serves health-conscious consumers through direct-to-consumer e-commerce platforms and offline retail partners, mainly operating in the North American market with a focus on sustainably sourced clean ingredients.
Ucommune International Ltd., formerly known as UrWork, is a Beijing-based co-working space provider founded in 2015 by Mao Daqing. It is now the second-largest co-working space provider after WeWork, with properties in three dozen cities around the world, including Shanghai, Singapore, Hong Kong and New York City. The company was valued at 1.8 billion US dollars in August 2018, making it the first domestic unicorn in the Chinese co-working space, but by November 2018, Ucommune had completed i...
LSF vs UK — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $13.3M | $16.4M |
| Net Profit | $-1.8M | $-6.9M |
| Gross Margin | 34.1% | — |
| Operating Margin | -13.5% | -23.6% |
| Net Margin | -13.2% | -42.2% |
| Revenue YoY | 15.0% | -56.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -341.4% | -30.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-8.55 |
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 | $13.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.0M | $16.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-1.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-975.1K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-362.2K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-156.2K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-398.4K | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-166.1K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-239.1K | $-6.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | 34.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 36.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 39.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 41.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 38.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 43.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 41.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 40.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | -13.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -7.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -4.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -3.4% | -23.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -11.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | -13.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -7.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -1.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.4% | -42.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -10.3% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-8.55 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $5.1M | $10.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $11.5M | $4.7M |
| Total Assets | $19.2M | $68.0M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $5.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.6M | $10.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $11.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.6M | $4.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $12.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | $19.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $20.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.0M | $68.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $17.6M | — |
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 | $68.4K | $-677.0K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-892.0K |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -5.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $68.4K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $339.2K | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $305.8K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $642.7K | $-677.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $-422.3K | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-892.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -5.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LSF
| Wholesale | $7.0M | 52% |
| Coffee Tea And Hot Chocolate Products | $4.4M | 33% |
| Hydration And Beverage Enhancing Supplements | $1.6M | 12% |
| Other | $352.6K | 3% |
UK
Segment breakdown not available.
