vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Chicago Atlantic Real Estate Finance, Inc. (REFI) and UTAH MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC (UTMD). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Chicago Atlantic Real Estate Finance, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($14.2M vs $9.0M, roughly 1.6× UTAH MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC). Chicago Atlantic Real Estate Finance, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 57.3% vs 28.4%, a 28.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Chicago Atlantic Real Estate Finance, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (1.2% vs -1.2%). Over the past eight quarters, Chicago Atlantic Real Estate Finance, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (3.7% CAGR vs -10.7%).
Chicago Atlantic Real Estate Finance, Inc. is a commercial real estate finance firm that primarily originates, underwrites, and manages secured senior mortgage loans for US commercial real estate assets. Its core segments include multifamily residential, industrial, retail, and office properties, serving experienced real estate operators and project sponsors.
Varian Medical Systems is an American radiation oncology treatments and software maker based in Palo Alto, California. Their medical devices include linear accelerators (LINACs) and software for treating cancer and other medical conditions with radiotherapy, radiosurgery, proton therapy, and brachytherapy. The company supplies software for managing cancer clinics, radiotherapy centers, and medical oncology practices. Varian Medical Systems employs more than 7,100 people at manufacturing sites...
REFI vs UTMD — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $14.2M | $9.0M |
| Net Profit | $8.2M | $2.6M |
| Gross Margin | — | 58.2% |
| Operating Margin | 57.3% | 27.0% |
| Net Margin | 57.3% | 28.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 1.2% | -1.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | 3.0% | -11.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.38 | $0.80 |
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 | $14.2M | $9.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.7M | $9.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.4M | $10.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.0M | $9.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $14.1M | $9.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.5M | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.2M | $10.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $13.2M | $11.3M |
| Q4 25 | $8.2M | $2.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.9M | $2.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.9M | $3.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.0M | $3.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.9M | $2.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.2M | $3.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.2M | $3.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.7M | $4.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | 58.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 57.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 56.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 57.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 58.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 58.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 60.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 59.7% |
| Q4 25 | 57.3% | 27.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 65.3% | 26.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 61.5% | 32.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 77.0% | 32.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 56.3% | 32.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 77.5% | 33.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 69.7% | 33.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 65.9% | 34.2% |
| Q4 25 | 57.3% | 28.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 65.3% | 26.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 61.5% | 30.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 77.0% | 31.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 56.3% | 31.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 77.5% | 35.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 69.7% | 33.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 65.9% | 34.9% |
| Q4 25 | $0.38 | $0.80 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.42 | $0.82 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.41 | $0.94 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.47 | $0.92 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.39 | $0.86 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.56 | $1.03 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.46 | $0.98 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.47 | $1.09 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $14.9M | $85.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $49.3M | $225.0K |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $307.8M | $119.3M |
| Total Assets | $424.9M | $122.5M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.16× | 0.00× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $14.9M | $85.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $28.9M | $84.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $35.6M | $82.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.9M | $83.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $26.4M | $83.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.8M | $88.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.1M | $89.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.9M | $93.8M |
| Q4 25 | $49.3M | $225.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | $49.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $49.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $49.2M | $269.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $49.1M | $282.0K | ||
| Q3 24 | $54.0M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $76.8M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $307.8M | $119.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $309.9M | $118.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $310.0M | $117.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $310.8M | $117.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $309.0M | $117.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $295.5M | $124.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $292.7M | $124.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $286.0M | $127.7M |
| Q4 25 | $424.9M | $122.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $427.1M | $122.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $455.2M | $120.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $414.7M | $122.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $435.1M | $122.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $365.9M | $129.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $386.5M | $130.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $383.7M | $135.4M |
| Q4 25 | 0.16× | 0.00× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.16× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.16× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.16× | 0.00× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.16× | 0.00× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.18× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.26× | — | ||
| Q1 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 | $28.8M | $3.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $3.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 37.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 3.53× | 1.36× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $14.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $28.8M | $3.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.2M | $3.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.5M | $2.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $7.6M | $4.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $23.2M | $2.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.2M | $3.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.2M | $2.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.9M | $5.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $3.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $3.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $5.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | 37.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 39.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 28.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 44.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 32.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 37.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 25.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 46.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.2% |
| Q4 25 | 3.53× | 1.36× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.92× | 1.47× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.73× | 0.94× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.76× | 1.47× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.92× | 1.01× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.73× | 1.08× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.68× | 0.80× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.79× | 1.33× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
