vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Outdoor Holding Co (POWW) and DNA X, Inc. (SONM). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
DNA X, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($16.2M vs $13.4M, roughly 1.2× Outdoor Holding Co). Outdoor Holding Co runs the higher net margin — 16.7% vs -29.3%, a 46.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, DNA X, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (7.9% vs -54.1%).
Vista Outdoor Inc. was an American designer, manufacturer, and marketer that operated in two segments: shooting sports and outdoor products. It was a "house of brands" with more than 40 labels and subsidiaries.
POWW vs SONM — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $13.4M | $16.2M |
| Net Profit | $2.2M | $-4.8M |
| Gross Margin | 87.1% | 11.2% |
| Operating Margin | 14.7% | -24.5% |
| Net Margin | 16.7% | -29.3% |
| Revenue YoY | -54.1% | 7.9% |
| Net Profit YoY | 108.5% | -89.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.01 | $-4.83 |
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 | $13.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.0M | $16.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $11.9M | $11.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.6M | $16.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.5M | $15.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $12.0M | $15.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $12.3M | $11.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-50.7M | $9.1M |
| Q4 25 | $2.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4M | $-4.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.5M | $-7.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-77.5M | $458.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $-26.1M | $-21.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-12.4M | $-2.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-14.8M | $-6.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-5.2M | $-2.9M |
| Q4 25 | 87.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 87.1% | 11.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 87.2% | 7.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 87.5% | 50.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 87.4% | -1.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 86.9% | 28.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 85.8% | 25.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 31.8% |
| Q4 25 | 14.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.9% | -24.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -50.7% | -60.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -213.6% | 3.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | -163.8% | 55.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -50.3% | -15.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -50.8% | -56.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -29.5% |
| Q4 25 | 16.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.7% | -29.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -54.5% | -66.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -614.5% | 2.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | -208.7% | -141.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -103.7% | -16.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -120.2% | -57.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.3% | -31.9% |
| Q4 25 | $0.01 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.01 | $-4.83 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.06 | $-0.79 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.67 | $0.08 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.23 | $-116.99 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.11 | $-9.32 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.13 | $-1.41 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.05 | $-0.65 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $69.9M | $2.1M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $5.1M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $237.3M | $-701.0K |
| Total Assets | $271.7M | $40.2M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $69.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $65.7M | $2.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $63.4M | $2.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $30.2M | $2.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $31.9M | $5.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $33.5M | $9.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $50.8M | $9.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $55.6M | $9.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $5.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $237.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $235.4M | $-701.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $222.5M | $-1.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $222.0M | $-1.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $299.6M | $-5.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $325.6M | $15.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $342.5M | $17.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $358.0M | $19.8M |
| Q4 25 | $271.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $270.3M | $40.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $269.5M | $36.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $297.3M | $36.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $355.4M | $39.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $368.9M | $49.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $398.6M | $45.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $403.0M | $42.4M |
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 | $5.7M | $-7.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $5.0M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 37.6% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 4.8% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.55× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-2.3M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $5.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.2M | $-7.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.7M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.5M | $-9.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3M | $-4.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.3M | $-417.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $-547.5K | $-3.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.3M | $-168.0K |
| Q4 25 | $5.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-7.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-2.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $720.3K | $-4.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.6M | $-554.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.3M | $-3.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.4M | $-198.0K |
| Q4 25 | 37.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -63.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -18.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.8% | -29.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -88.3% | -3.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -11.0% | -29.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.8% | -2.2% |
| Q4 25 | 4.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.4% | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.4% | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.5% | 0.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | -5.7% | 0.3% |
| Q4 25 | 2.55× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.29× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -20.97× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
