vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES INC. (MRAM) and Venus Concept Inc. (VERO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES INC. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($14.9M vs $13.8M, roughly 1.1× Venus Concept Inc.). EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES INC. runs the higher net margin — -2.0% vs -163.8%, a 161.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES INC. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (13.2% vs -8.2%). Over the past eight quarters, EVERSPIN TECHNOLOGIES INC.'s revenue compounded faster (18.2% CAGR vs -12.8%).
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.
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.
MRAM vs VERO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $14.9M | $13.8M |
| Net Profit | $-296.0K | $-22.6M |
| Gross Margin | 52.7% | 64.0% |
| Operating Margin | 29.0% | -68.9% |
| Net Margin | -2.0% | -163.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 13.2% | -8.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -143.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.01 | $-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.
| Q1 26 | $14.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $14.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.1M | $13.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $13.2M | $15.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.1M | $13.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $13.2M | $15.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.1M | $15.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.6M | $16.6M |
| Q1 26 | $-296.0K | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $54.0K | $-22.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-670.0K | $-11.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.2M | $-12.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2M | $-8.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.3M | $-9.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-2.5M | $-20.0M |
| Q1 26 | 52.7% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 50.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 51.3% | 64.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 51.3% | 60.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 51.4% | 64.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 51.3% | 69.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 49.2% | 66.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 49.0% | 71.5% |
| Q1 26 | 29.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -7.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -11.0% | -68.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -14.9% | -57.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -14.7% | -69.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -11.8% | -42.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -17.5% | -47.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -26.5% | -33.7% |
| Q1 26 | -2.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 8.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.4% | -163.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -5.1% | -74.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -8.9% | -90.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.2% | -50.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.8% | -61.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -23.5% | -120.3% |
| Q1 26 | $-0.01 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $0.05 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.00 | $-12.14 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.03 | $-8.03 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.05 | $-17.44 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.07 | $-10.26 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.10 | $-13.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.12 | $-30.93 |
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 | $4.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $70.2M | $2.7M |
| Total Assets | $83.2M | $61.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $40.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $44.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $45.3M | $4.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $45.0M | $3.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $42.2M | $3.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $42.1M | $4.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $39.6M | $4.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $36.8M | $5.7M |
| Q1 26 | $70.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $68.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $65.8M | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $64.1M | $2.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $63.0M | $2.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $62.6M | $2.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $59.3M | $10.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $55.4M | $3.7M |
| Q1 26 | $83.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $84.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $80.3M | $61.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $78.9M | $63.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $80.2M | $63.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $77.8M | $68.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $72.6M | $72.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $64.6M | $79.8M |
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 | $-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.
| Q1 26 | $570.0K | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $881.0K | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.0M | $-5.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4M | $-6.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.8M | $-3.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8M | $-3.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7M | $-1.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $-975.0K | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $543.0K | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.0M | $-5.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $527.0K | $-6.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.1M | $-3.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.8M | $-3.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7M | $-1.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -6.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.9% | -35.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.9% | -35.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.0% | -46.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.8% | -24.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.9% | -20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 15.9% | -8.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 24.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.4% | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.1% | 1.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.9% | 0.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 13.2% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.5% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.3% | 0.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.19× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.31× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.16× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.25× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
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% |
VERO
| Products And Services | $10.8M | 79% |
| Leases | $2.9M | 21% |
