vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Laird Superfood, Inc. (LSF) and Venus Concept Inc. (VERO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Venus Concept Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($13.8M vs $13.3M, roughly 1.0× Laird Superfood, Inc.). Laird Superfood, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -13.2% vs -163.8%, a 150.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Laird Superfood, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (15.0% vs -8.2%). Over the past eight quarters, Laird Superfood, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (16.1% CAGR vs -12.8%).
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.
Venus Concept Inc is a global medical technology firm specializing in the development, manufacturing, and distribution of non-invasive and minimally invasive aesthetic medical devices. Its product portfolio covers hair removal, skin rejuvenation, body contouring, and anti-aging solutions, serving dermatology clinics, plastic surgery centers, and medical spas across North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific markets.
LSF vs VERO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $13.3M | $13.8M |
| Net Profit | $-1.8M | $-22.6M |
| Gross Margin | 34.1% | 64.0% |
| Operating Margin | -13.5% | -68.9% |
| Net Margin | -13.2% | -163.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 15.0% | -8.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -341.4% | -143.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-12.14 |
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 | $13.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.0M | $15.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.7M | $13.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.6M | $15.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.8M | $15.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.0M | $16.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.9M | $17.5M |
| Q4 25 | $-1.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-975.1K | $-22.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-362.2K | $-11.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-156.2K | $-12.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-398.4K | $-8.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-166.1K | $-9.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-239.1K | $-20.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-1.0M | $-9.8M |
| Q4 25 | 34.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 36.5% | 64.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 39.9% | 60.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 41.9% | 64.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 38.6% | 69.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 43.0% | 66.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 41.8% | 71.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 40.0% | 66.6% |
| Q4 25 | -13.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -7.7% | -68.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.3% | -57.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.9% | -69.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -4.1% | -42.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.3% | -47.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -3.4% | -33.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | -11.0% | -44.4% |
| Q4 25 | -13.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -7.6% | -163.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.0% | -74.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -1.3% | -90.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.4% | -50.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -1.4% | -61.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.4% | -120.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | -10.3% | -56.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-12.14 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-8.03 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-17.44 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-10.26 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-13.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-30.93 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-16.92 |
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 | $4.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $11.5M | $2.7M |
| Total Assets | $19.2M | $61.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $5.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.1M | $4.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.9M | $3.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.0M | $3.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.3M | $4.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.9M | $4.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.6M | $5.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.1M | $5.1M |
| Q4 25 | $11.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.8M | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.4M | $2.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.3M | $2.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.2M | $2.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $13.1M | $10.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.6M | $3.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $12.7M | $-22.5M |
| Q4 25 | $19.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $18.9M | $61.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $20.4M | $63.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.5M | $63.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.3M | $68.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.8M | $72.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $18.0M | $79.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $17.6M | $85.1M |
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 | $-4.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-4.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -35.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-20.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $68.4K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.8M | $-5.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.3M | $-6.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $339.2K | $-3.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $305.8K | $-3.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $642.7K | $-1.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-422.3K | $-2.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-5.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-6.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-3.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-3.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-1.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-2.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -35.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -35.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -46.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -24.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -8.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -16.6% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.1% |
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% |
VERO
| Products And Services | $10.8M | 79% |
| Leases | $2.9M | 21% |
