vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES INC. (MRAM) and TAYLOR DEVICES, INC. (TAYD). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($14.9M vs $11.6M, roughly 1.3× TAYLOR DEVICES, INC.). TAYLOR DEVICES, INC. runs the higher net margin — 17.3% vs -2.0%, a 19.3% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, TAYLOR DEVICES, INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (35.7% vs 13.2%). Over the past eight quarters, EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES INC.'s revenue compounded faster (18.2% CAGR vs -2.7%).
Everspin Technologies, Inc. is a publicly traded semiconductor company headquartered in Chandler, Arizona, United States. It develops and manufactures discrete magnetoresistive RAM or magnetoresistive random-access memory (MRAM) products, including Toggle MRAM and Spin-Transfer Torque MRAM (STT-MRAM) product families. It also licenses its technology for use in embedded MRAM (eMRAM) applications, magnetic sensor applications as well as performs backend foundry services for eMRAM.
Taylor Corporation is a privately owned print and communications company headquartered in North Mankato, Minnesota, and was founded in 1975 by businessman Glen Taylor. The company comprises more than 90 locations and employs nearly 10,000 employees. Taylor has print operations in dozens of U.S. states and multiple countries around the world.
MRAM vs TAYD — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q2 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $14.9M | $11.6M |
| Net Profit | $-296.0K | $2.0M |
| Gross Margin | 52.7% | 47.0% |
| Operating Margin | 29.0% | 19.2% |
| Net Margin | -2.0% | 17.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 13.2% | 35.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 90.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.01 | — |
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.
| Q1 26 | $14.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $14.8M | $11.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.1M | $9.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.2M | $15.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.1M | $10.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.2M | $8.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.1M | $11.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.6M | $12.1M |
| Q1 26 | $-296.0K | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2M | $2.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $54.0K | $2.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-670.0K | $3.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.2M | $2.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2M | $1.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.3M | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-2.5M | $2.5M |
| Q1 26 | 52.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 50.8% | 47.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 51.3% | 44.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 51.3% | 48.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 51.4% | 42.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 51.3% | 45.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 49.2% | 47.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 49.0% | 48.8% |
| Q1 26 | 29.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -7.2% | 19.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -11.0% | 22.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | -14.9% | 24.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -14.7% | 19.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -11.8% | 11.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | -17.5% | 25.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -26.5% | 20.8% |
| Q1 26 | -2.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 8.1% | 17.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.4% | 22.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -5.1% | 23.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -8.9% | 19.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.2% | 12.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.8% | 23.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | -23.5% | 20.5% |
| Q1 26 | $-0.01 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.05 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.00 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.03 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.05 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.07 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.10 | — | ||
| 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 | $40.5M | $40.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $70.2M | $67.1M |
| Total Assets | $83.2M | $72.8M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $40.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $44.5M | $40.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $45.3M | $36.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $45.0M | $36.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $42.2M | $35.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $42.1M | $26.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $39.6M | $27.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $36.8M | $31.0M |
| Q1 26 | $70.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $68.9M | $67.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $65.8M | $64.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $64.1M | $62.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $63.0M | $57.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $62.6M | $55.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $59.3M | $53.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $55.4M | $51.2M |
| Q1 26 | $83.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $84.6M | $72.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $80.3M | $70.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $78.9M | $71.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $80.2M | $70.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $77.8M | $62.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $72.6M | $61.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $64.6M | $63.1M |
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 | $570.0K | $5.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $4.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 38.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 11.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 2.86× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $14.1M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $570.0K | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.6M | $5.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $881.0K | $483.6K | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.0M | $1.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4M | $9.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.8M | $103.1K | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8M | $-3.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7M | $6.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-975.0K | $4.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $543.0K | $298.6K | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.0M | $491.3K | ||
| Q1 25 | $527.0K | $8.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.1M | $-620.5K | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8M | $-3.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7M | $6.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -6.6% | 38.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.9% | 3.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.9% | 3.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.0% | 83.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.8% | -7.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.9% | -33.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.9% | 51.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 24.3% | 11.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.4% | 1.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.1% | 9.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.9% | 1.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.2% | 8.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.5% | 2.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.3% | 3.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.19× | 2.86× | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.31× | 0.22× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.52× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.51× | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.16× | 0.10× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.25× | -1.35× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.65× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
MRAM
| Product sales | $14.1M | 95% |
| Licensing, royalty, patent, engineering services and other revenue | $772.0K | 5% |
TAYD
Segment breakdown not available.
