vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. (PBYI) and Planet Image International Ltd (YIBO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Planet Image International Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($80.7M vs $75.5M, roughly 1.1× PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC.). PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($14.4M vs $1.6M).
Puma Biotechnology is a publicly traded biopharmaceutical company headquartered in Los Angeles, CA.
Planet Labs PBC, known as "Planet.", is a publicly traded American Earth imaging company based in San Francisco, California. Their goal is to image the entirety of the Earth daily to monitor changes and pinpoint trends.
PBYI vs YIBO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $75.5M | $80.7M |
| Net Profit | — | $-213.0K |
| Gross Margin | 69.3% | 26.9% |
| Operating Margin | 22.7% | -1.0% |
| Net Margin | — | -0.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 27.7% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.26 | $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.
| Q4 25 | $75.5M | $80.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $54.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $52.4M | $74.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $46.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $59.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $80.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $47.1M | $77.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $43.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $-213.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.9M | $-8.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $20.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-4.5M | $4.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-4.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | 69.3% | 26.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 77.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 76.5% | 32.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 77.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 76.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 63.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 77.4% | 36.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 75.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 22.7% | -1.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.7% | -14.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 27.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -4.6% | 7.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | -5.3% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.2% | -10.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 25.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -9.6% | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -11.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | $0.26 | $0.01 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.17 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.12 | $-0.15 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.06 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.40 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.41 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.09 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.10 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $97.5M | $54.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $22.7M | $8.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $130.3M | $57.9M |
| Total Assets | $216.3M | $154.1M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.17× | 0.15× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $97.5M | $54.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $94.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $96.0M | $54.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $93.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $101.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $96.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $96.8M | $53.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $107.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | $22.7M | $8.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $34.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $45.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $56.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $68.0M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $79.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $90.7M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $102.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | $130.3M | $57.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $115.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $104.7M | $58.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $97.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $92.1M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $71.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $48.5M | $53.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $51.0M | — |
| Q4 25 | $216.3M | $154.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $202.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $194.9M | $140.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $196.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $213.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $220.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $205.0M | $139.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $214.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.17× | 0.15× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.30× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.43× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.58× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.74× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.12× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.87× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.00× | — |
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 | $14.4M | $2.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $14.4M | $1.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 19.1% | 2.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.0% | 0.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $41.7M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $14.4M | $2.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.1M | $-4.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | $14.4M | $1.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.1M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $15.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 19.1% | 2.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.8% | -6.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 26.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 13.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.1% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.0% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.0% | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.10× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.41× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.21× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.54× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
