vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Aurora Innovation, Inc. (AUR) and Aurora Innovation, Inc. (AUROW), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Aurora Innovation, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.0M vs $1.0M, roughly 1.0× Aurora Innovation, Inc.).
Aurora Innovation, Inc., doing business as Aurora, is a self-driving vehicle technology company based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Aurora has developed the Aurora Driver, a computer system that can be integrated into cars for autonomous driving. It was co-founded by Chris Urmson, the former chief technology officer of Google/Alphabet Inc.'s self-driving team, which became known as Waymo, as well as by Sterling Anderson, former head of Tesla Autopilot, and Drew Bagnell, former head of Uber's a...
Aurora Innovation, Inc., doing business as Aurora, is a self-driving vehicle technology company based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Aurora has developed the Aurora Driver, a computer system that can be integrated into cars for autonomous driving. It was co-founded by Chris Urmson, the former chief technology officer of Google/Alphabet Inc.'s self-driving team, which became known as Waymo, as well as by Sterling Anderson, former head of Tesla Autopilot, and Drew Bagnell, former head of Uber's a...
Income Statement — Q3 2025 vs Q3 2025
| Metric |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.0M | $1.0M |
| Net Profit | $-201.0M | $-201.0M |
| Gross Margin | -500.0% | -500.0% |
| Operating Margin | -22200.0% | -22200.0% |
| Net Margin | -20100.0% | -20100.0% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 3.4% | 3.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.11 | $-0.11 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q3 25 | $1.0M | $1.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.0M | $1.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Q2 23 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Q1 23 | $0 | $0 | ||
| Q4 22 | $2.1M | $2.1M | ||
| Q3 22 | $2.9M | $2.9M |
| Q3 25 | $-201.0M | $-201.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-201.0M | $-201.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-208.0M | $-208.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-182.0M | $-182.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $-218.0M | $-218.0M | ||
| Q1 23 | $-196.0M | $-196.0M | ||
| Q4 22 | $-294.0M | $-294.0M | ||
| Q3 22 | $-198.0M | $-198.0M |
| Q3 25 | -500.0% | -500.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -400.0% | -400.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q1 23 | — | — | ||
| Q4 22 | — | — | ||
| Q3 22 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | -22200.0% | -22200.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -23000.0% | -23000.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q1 23 | — | — | ||
| Q4 22 | -14835.9% | -14835.9% | ||
| Q3 22 | -6903.7% | -6903.7% |
| Q3 25 | -20100.0% | -20100.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -20100.0% | -20100.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q1 23 | — | — | ||
| Q4 22 | -13980.0% | -13980.0% | ||
| Q3 22 | -6834.7% | -6834.7% |
| Q3 25 | $-0.11 | $-0.11 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.11 | $-0.11 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.13 | $-0.13 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.12 | $-0.12 | ||
| Q2 23 | $-0.18 | $-0.18 | ||
| Q1 23 | $-0.17 | $-0.17 | ||
| Q4 22 | $-0.25 | $-0.25 | ||
| Q3 22 | $-0.17 | $-0.17 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $87.0M | $87.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.3B | $2.3B |
| Total Assets | $2.5B | $2.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q3 25 | $87.0M | $87.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $206.0M | $206.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $263.0M | $263.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $402.0M | $402.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $785.0M | $785.0M | ||
| Q1 23 | $966.0M | $966.0M | ||
| Q4 22 | $1.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 22 | $1.2B | $1.2B |
| Q3 25 | $2.3B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.0B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.0B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 23 | $1.4B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 23 | $1.6B | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 22 | $1.8B | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 22 | $2.0B | $2.0B |
| Q3 25 | $2.5B | $2.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.2B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.3B | $2.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.9B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 23 | $1.7B | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 23 | $1.9B | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 22 | $2.0B | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 22 | $2.3B | $2.3B |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $-149.0M | $-149.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-157.0M | $-157.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -15700.0% | -15700.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 800.0% | 800.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-645.0M | $-645.0M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q3 25 | $-149.0M | $-149.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-144.0M | $-144.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-143.0M | $-143.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-176.0M | $-176.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $-182.0M | $-182.0M | ||
| Q1 23 | $-136.0M | $-136.0M | ||
| Q4 22 | $-141.0M | $-141.0M | ||
| Q3 22 | $-142.0M | $-142.0M |
| Q3 25 | $-157.0M | $-157.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-151.0M | $-151.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-150.0M | $-150.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-187.0M | $-187.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $-186.0M | $-186.0M | ||
| Q1 23 | $-138.0M | $-138.0M | ||
| Q4 22 | $-144.0M | $-144.0M | ||
| Q3 22 | $-145.0M | $-145.0M |
| Q3 25 | -15700.0% | -15700.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | -15100.0% | -15100.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q1 23 | — | — | ||
| Q4 22 | -6847.4% | -6847.4% | ||
| Q3 22 | -5005.2% | -5005.2% |
| Q3 25 | 800.0% | 800.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 700.0% | 700.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q1 23 | — | — | ||
| Q4 22 | 142.7% | 142.7% | ||
| Q3 22 | 103.6% | 103.6% |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
