vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Functional Brands Inc. (MEHA) and Nano Labs Ltd (NA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Nano Labs Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.7M vs $1.7M, roughly 1.6× Functional Brands Inc.). Nano Labs Ltd runs the higher net margin — 754.5% vs 15.3%, a 739.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. Functional Brands Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.5M vs $-8.4M).
Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. is an American manufacturer of home and security products, headquartered in Deerfield, Illinois. Its portfolio of businesses and brands includes Moen and the House of Rohl; outdoor living and security products from Therma-Tru, Larson, Fiberon, Master Lock and SentrySafe; and MasterBrand Cabinets. Fortune Brands is a Fortune 500 company and part of the S&P 400 Index. As of December 31, 2021, the company reported employing approximately 28,000 associates and pos...
Weebit Nano is a public semiconductor IP company founded in Israel in 2015 and headquartered in Hod HaSharon, Israel. The company develops Resistive Random-Access Memory technologies. Resistive Random-Access Memory is a specialized form of non-volatile memory (NVM) for the semiconductor industry. The company's products are targeted at a broad range of NVM markets where persistence, performance, and endurance are all required. ReRAM technology can be integrated in electronic devices like weara...
MEHA vs NA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.7M | $2.7M |
| Net Profit | $259.0K | $20.3M |
| Gross Margin | 57.7% | — |
| Operating Margin | -4.6% | — |
| Net Margin | 15.3% | 754.5% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.04 | $1.03 |
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 | — | $2.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | $20.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $259.0K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-985.5K | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-8.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 57.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -4.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -459.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -237.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | 754.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -85.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -231.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.03 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.04 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.06 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.12 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.0M | $4.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $141.3K | $24.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $604.7K | $106.5M |
| Total Assets | $8.2M | $159.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.23× | 0.23× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $4.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $50.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $24.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $141.3K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $24.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $22.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | $106.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $604.7K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $86.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-5.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | $159.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $206.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $51.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.23× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.23× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.29× | ||
| Q2 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 | $1.5M | $-8.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.5M | $-8.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 86.8% | -312.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.5% | 2.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 5.71× | -0.41× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $-8.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-7.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-10.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-8.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-7.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-15.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | -312.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 86.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -620.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -443.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 133.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.41× | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.71× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
