BGXX Quote, Financials, Valuation and Earnings

iBio has a net margin of -- compared to Bright Green's net margin of -4444.57%. Bright Green's return on equity of -- beat iBio's return on equity of -148.3%.

Bright Green has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand iBio has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 45.16%. Given that iBio has higher upside potential than Bright Green, analysts believe iBio is more attractive than Bright Green.

Bright Green has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison iBio has a beta of -3.237, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 423.713%.

Bright Green has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. iBio offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Bright Green pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. iBio pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Bright Green quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than iBio quarterly revenues of $175K. Bright Green's net income of -$1.4M is higher than iBio's net income of -$4M. Notably, Bright Green's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while iBio's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Bright Green is -- versus -- for iBio. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

NovaBay Pharmaceuticals has a net margin of -- compared to Bright Green's net margin of -49.65%. Bright Green's return on equity of -- beat NovaBay Pharmaceuticals's return on equity of -461.38%.

Bright Green has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand NovaBay Pharmaceuticals has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 602.96%. Given that NovaBay Pharmaceuticals has higher upside potential than Bright Green, analysts believe NovaBay Pharmaceuticals is more attractive than Bright Green.

Bright Green has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison NovaBay Pharmaceuticals has a beta of 0.686, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 31.383%.

Bright Green has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. NovaBay Pharmaceuticals offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Bright Green pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. NovaBay Pharmaceuticals pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Bright Green quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than NovaBay Pharmaceuticals quarterly revenues of $2.4M. Bright Green's net income of -$1.4M is lower than NovaBay Pharmaceuticals's net income of -$1.2M. Notably, Bright Green's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while NovaBay Pharmaceuticals's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Bright Green is -- versus 0.06x for NovaBay Pharmaceuticals. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Palatin Technologies has a net margin of -- compared to Bright Green's net margin of -2357.27%. Bright Green's return on equity of -- beat Palatin Technologies's return on equity of --.

Bright Green has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Palatin Technologies has an analysts' consensus of -- which suggests that it could grow by 1656.38%. Given that Palatin Technologies has higher upside potential than Bright Green, analysts believe Palatin Technologies is more attractive than Bright Green.

Bright Green has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Palatin Technologies has a beta of 0.901, suggesting its less volatile than the S&P 500 by 9.9%.

Bright Green has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Palatin Technologies offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Bright Green pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Palatin Technologies pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Bright Green quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Palatin Technologies quarterly revenues of $350K. Bright Green's net income of -$1.4M is higher than Palatin Technologies's net income of -$7.8M. Notably, Bright Green's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Palatin Technologies's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Bright Green is -- versus -- for Palatin Technologies. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.

Theriva Biologics has a net margin of -- compared to Bright Green's net margin of --. Bright Green's return on equity of -- beat Theriva Biologics's return on equity of --.

Bright Green has a consensus price target of --, signalling downside risk potential of --. On the other hand Theriva Biologics has an analysts' consensus of $100.00 which suggests that it could grow by 7838.6%. Given that Theriva Biologics has higher upside potential than Bright Green, analysts believe Theriva Biologics is more attractive than Bright Green.

Bright Green has a beta of 0.000, which suggesting that the stock is 100% less volatile than S&P 500. In comparison Theriva Biologics has a beta of 1.329, suggesting its more volatile than the S&P 500 by 32.874%.

Bright Green has a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share corresponding to a yield of 0%. Theriva Biologics offers a yield of 0% to investors and pays a quarterly dividend of $0.00 per share. Bright Green pays -- of its earnings as a dividend. Theriva Biologics pays out -- of its earnings as a dividend.

Bright Green quarterly revenues are --, which are smaller than Theriva Biologics quarterly revenues of --. Bright Green's net income of -$1.4M is higher than Theriva Biologics's net income of -$7.7M. Notably, Bright Green's price-to-earnings ratio is -- while Theriva Biologics's PE ratio is --. Generally a lower price-to-earnings ratio signals a stock is trading at a lower multiple of earnings and is a better value. Another key metric is the price-to-sales ratio, which for Bright Green is -- versus 0.90x for Theriva Biologics. Usually stocks with elevated PS ratios are considered overvalued.