vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of SuperCom Ltd (SPCB) and Xilio Therapeutics, Inc. (XLO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
SuperCom Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($14.2M vs $13.7M, roughly 1.0× Xilio Therapeutics, Inc.). Xilio Therapeutics, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 75.7% vs 37.5%, a 38.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. Xilio Therapeutics, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-2.1M vs $-3.6M).
Super.com is a technology company headquartered in San Francisco and co-founded by Hussein Fazal and Henry Shi. The company provides financial services, including reward programs and travel bookings.
Xilio Therapeutics is a clinical-stage biotechnology company dedicated to developing novel tumor-selective immunotherapies for cancer treatment. Its product pipeline features candidates engineered to trigger anti-tumor immune responses specifically inside tumor microenvironments, reducing systemic toxicities, and it primarily targets oncology patient populations in North America and other global markets.
SPCB vs XLO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $14.2M | $13.7M |
| Net Profit | $5.3M | $10.4M |
| Gross Margin | 61.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | 16.3% | -86.5% |
| Net Margin | 37.5% | 75.7% |
| Revenue YoY | -1.5% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 79.5% | 179.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $1.32 | $-3.74 |
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 | — | $13.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $19.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.2M | $8.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.4M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $14.1M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $6.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $10.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-16.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.3M | $-15.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-13.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.0M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $-2.6M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-5.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 61.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 52.3% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | 27.2% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 41.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -86.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -10.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 16.3% | -177.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -472.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 7.7% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | -12.2% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | -49.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 75.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -85.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 37.5% | -196.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -452.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 20.6% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | -18.3% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | -82.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $-3.74 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.11 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.32 | $-0.16 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.18 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.19 | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $-10.66 | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-1.54 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $15.0M | $137.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $23.6M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $37.3M | $35.3M |
| Total Assets | $65.5M | $154.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.63× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $137.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $103.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $15.0M | $121.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $89.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.7M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $1.1M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $2.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $29.2M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $32.9M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $32.3M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $35.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-8.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $37.3M | $7.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $10.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.8M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $3.5M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $3.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $154.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $133.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $65.5M | $133.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $103.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $49.6M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $40.8M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $42.7M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.63× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.11× | — | ||
| Q2 23 | 9.49× | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 8.68× | — |
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 | $-2.2M | $-2.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-3.6M | $-2.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -25.3% | -15.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 10.0% | 0.7% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -0.41× | -0.19× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-14.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $-2.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-17.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-2.2M | $-14.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $29.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-950.0K | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $-3.4M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-4.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $-2.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.6M | $-14.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $29.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.6M | — | ||
| Q2 23 | $-4.5M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-4.4M | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -15.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -25.3% | -184.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 988.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -10.8% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | -31.5% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | -70.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.0% | 5.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 4.2% | — | ||
| Q2 23 | 7.4% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 4.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.19× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.41× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -0.32× | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
