vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of VALUE LINE INC (VALU) and Venus Concept Inc. (VERO). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Venus Concept Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($13.8M vs $8.3M, roughly 1.7× VALUE LINE INC). VALUE LINE INC runs the higher net margin — 71.4% vs -163.8%, a 235.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, VALUE LINE INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-7.7% vs -8.2%). Over the past eight quarters, VALUE LINE INC's revenue compounded faster (-4.1% CAGR vs -12.8%).
Value Line, Inc. is a publicly traded investment research and financial publishing firm based in New York City. Founded in 1931 by Arnold Bernhard, Value Line is best known for publishing The Value Line Investment Survey, a stock analysis newsletter that tracks approximately 1,700 publicly traded stocks.
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.
VALU vs VERO — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $8.3M | $13.8M |
| Net Profit | $5.9M | $-22.6M |
| Gross Margin | — | 64.0% |
| Operating Margin | 12.1% | -68.9% |
| Net Margin | 71.4% | -163.8% |
| Revenue YoY | -7.7% | -8.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | 14.5% | -143.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-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 | $8.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $8.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.6M | $13.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.4M | $15.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.0M | $13.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.8M | $15.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.9M | $15.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $9.0M | $16.6M |
| Q1 26 | $5.9M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $5.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.5M | $-22.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.0M | $-11.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.2M | $-12.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.7M | $-8.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.9M | $-9.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.8M | $-20.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 64.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 60.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 64.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 69.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 66.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 71.5% |
| Q1 26 | 12.1% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 17.4% | -68.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.9% | -57.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 17.4% | -69.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.7% | -42.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 20.8% | -47.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.5% | -33.7% |
| Q1 26 | 71.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 66.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 75.1% | -163.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 47.1% | -74.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 57.6% | -90.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 64.3% | -50.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 66.3% | -61.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 53.1% | -120.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-12.14 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-8.03 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-17.44 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-10.26 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-13.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-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 | $92.5M | $4.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $107.8M | $2.7M |
| Total Assets | $151.0M | $61.6M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $92.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $86.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $33.7M | $4.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $67.7M | $3.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $52.8M | $3.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $22.3M | $4.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $30.9M | $4.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.4M | $5.7M |
| Q1 26 | $107.8M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $105.5M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $103.0M | $2.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $99.7M | $2.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $99.0M | $2.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $96.7M | $2.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $93.9M | $10.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $90.8M | $3.7M |
| Q1 26 | $151.0M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $147.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $148.2M | $61.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $144.5M | $63.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $143.6M | $63.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $140.0M | $68.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $138.6M | $72.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $136.0M | $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 | $5.3M | $-4.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-4.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -35.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.0% | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.89× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-20.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $5.3M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.6M | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $20.2M | $-5.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.9M | $-6.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1M | $-3.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.8M | $-3.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.9M | $-1.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-4.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $20.1M | $-5.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.8M | $-6.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0M | $-3.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.8M | $-3.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.9M | $-1.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -35.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 239.2% | -35.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 75.3% | -46.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.1% | -24.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 53.7% | -20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 199.0% | -8.2% |
| Q1 26 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.0% | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.1% | 1.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.2% | 0.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.7% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.0% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.2% | 0.1% |
| Q1 26 | 0.89× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.52× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.86× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.12× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.33× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.54× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.81× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.75× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
VALU
Segment breakdown not available.
VERO
| Products And Services | $10.8M | 79% |
| Leases | $2.9M | 21% |
