Software - Application
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CYN vs LIDR vs RBOT vs IROQ vs ZVIA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Auto - Parts
Medical - Devices
Banks - Regional
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
CYN vs LIDR vs RBOT vs IROQ vs ZVIA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Software - Application | Auto - Parts | Medical - Devices | Banks - Regional | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $14M | $74M | $3M | $89M | $100M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $276K | $270K | $0.00 | $48M | $169M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-26M | $-34M | $-42M | $5M | $-7M |
| Gross Margin | 34.4% | -144.1% | — | 59.5% | 47.1% |
| Operating Margin | -99.2% | -125.8% | — | 14.9% | -3.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 19.4x | — |
| Total Debt | $7M | $235K | $8M | $73M | $668K |
| Cash & Equiv. | $990K | $43M | $3M | $20M | $25M |
CYN vs LIDR vs RBOT vs IROQ vs ZVIA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cyngn Inc. (CYN) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| AEye, Inc. (LIDR) | 100 | 1.0 | -99.0% |
| Vicarious Surgical … (RBOT) | 100 | 0.1 | -99.9% |
| IF Bancorp, Inc. (IROQ) | 100 | 123.2 | +23.2% |
| Zevia PBC (ZVIA) | 100 | 13.2 | -86.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CYN vs LIDR vs RBOT vs IROQ vs ZVIA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CYN is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 2.18
- Beta 2.18, current ratio 8.29x
LIDR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 15.3%, EPS growth 79.9%, 3Y rev CAGR -60.0%
- +86.2% vs RBOT's -94.1%
RBOT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 31.5% revenue growth vs CYN's -40.5%
IROQ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 60.1% 10Y total return vs ZVIA's -89.2%
- 10.8% margin vs LIDR's -127.0%
- 1.5% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- 0.6% ROA vs RBOT's -164.5%, ROIC 2.9% vs -116.2%
ZVIA is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.92, Low D/E 1.9%, current ratio 2.08x
- Beta 0.92 vs LIDR's 2.51
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 31.5% revenue growth vs CYN's -40.5% | |
| Quality / Margins | 10.8% margin vs LIDR's -127.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.92 vs LIDR's 2.51 | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +86.2% vs RBOT's -94.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 0.6% ROA vs RBOT's -164.5%, ROIC 2.9% vs -116.2% |
CYN vs LIDR vs RBOT vs IROQ vs ZVIA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
CYN vs LIDR vs RBOT vs IROQ vs ZVIA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IROQ leads in 4 of 6 categories
ZVIA leads 1 • CYN leads 1 • LIDR leads 0 • RBOT leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IROQ leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ZVIA and RBOT operate at a comparable scale, with $169M and $0 in trailing revenue. IROQ is the more profitable business, keeping 10.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LIDR's -127.0%. On growth, CYN holds the edge at +121.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $276,397 | $270,000 | $0 | $48M | $169M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$26M | -$34M | -$41M | $7M | -$5M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$26M | -$34M | -$42M | $5M | -$7M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$27M | -$29M | -$40M | $6M | -$703,000 |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +34.4% | -144.1% | — | +59.5% | +47.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -99.2% | -125.8% | — | +14.9% | -3.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -94.2% | -127.0% | — | +10.8% | -4.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -97.1% | -106.7% | — | +12.4% | -0.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +121.8% | +57.8% | — | — | +21.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +91.1% | -63.6% | +58.1% | +115.0% | +62.5% |
Valuation Metrics
ZVIA leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $14M | $74M | $3M | $89M | $100M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $19M | $31M | $9M | $142M | $75M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.24x | -1.78x | -0.06x | 19.38x | -9.87x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 21.69x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 62.34x | 318.04x | — | 1.84x | 0.62x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.15x | 0.74x | 0.31x | 1.02x | 2.74x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 13.65x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
IROQ leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IROQ delivers a 6.2% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-3 for RBOT. LIDR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IROQ's 0.89x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IROQ scores 7/9 vs RBOT's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -59.6% | -56.2% | -3.3% | +6.2% | -19.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -48.1% | -48.5% | -164.5% | +0.6% | -11.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -117.2% | -100.7% | -116.2% | +2.9% | -58.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -71.5% | -64.7% | -134.6% | +3.9% | -24.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.18x | 0.00x | 0.79x | 0.89x | 0.02x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $6M | -$43M | $5M | $53M | -$25M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $990,023 | $43M | $3M | $20M | $25M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $7M | $235,000 | $8M | $73M | $668,000 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -59.79x | -80.57x | — | 2.72x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IROQ leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IROQ five years ago would be worth $12,544 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $0 for CYN. Over the past 12 months, LIDR leads with a +86.2% total return vs RBOT's -94.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IROQ at 26.0% vs CYN's -95.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -54.9% | -24.2% | -79.8% | -1.6% | -26.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -72.6% | +86.2% | -94.1% | +11.1% | -48.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -70.4% | -99.2% | +99.9% | -68.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -99.5% | -99.8% | +25.4% | -89.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -99.5% | -99.8% | +60.1% | -89.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -95.5% | -33.4% | -80.0% | +26.0% | -31.8% |
Risk & Volatility
IROQ leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IROQ is the less volatile stock with a -0.05 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LIDR's 2.51 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IROQ currently trades 91.6% from its 52-week high vs CYN's 3.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.18x | 2.51x | 2.42x | -0.05x | 0.92x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $41.54 | $6.44 | $13.75 | $29.00 | $3.66 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.22 | $0.71 | $0.35 | $23.21 | $1.11 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +3.0% | +24.8% | +3.7% | +91.6% | +40.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.0 | 36.7 | 36.5 | 34.4 | 47.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 277K | 3.4M | 14K | 103K | 761K |
Analyst Outlook
CYN leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LIDR as "Hold", ZVIA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 650.0% upside for LIDR (target: $12) vs 136.5% for ZVIA (target: $4). IROQ is the only dividend payer here at 1.54% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | — | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $12.00 | — | — | $3.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 4 | — | — | 8 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +1.5% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | — | — | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $0.41 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
IROQ leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ZVIA leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
CYN vs LIDR vs RBOT vs IROQ vs ZVIA: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CYN or LIDR or RBOT or IROQ or ZVIA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, AEye, Inc.
(LIDR) is the stronger pick with 15. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -40. 5% for Cyngn Inc. (CYN). IF Bancorp, Inc. (IROQ) offers the better valuation at 19. 4x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Zevia PBC (ZVIA) a "Buy" — based on 8 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which is the better long-term investment — CYN or LIDR or RBOT or IROQ or ZVIA?
Over the past 5 years, IF Bancorp, Inc.
(IROQ) delivered a total return of +25. 4%, compared to -100. 0% for Cyngn Inc. (CYN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IROQ returned +60. 1% versus CYN's -100. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — CYN or LIDR or RBOT or IROQ or ZVIA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), IF Bancorp, Inc.
(IROQ) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 05β versus AEye, Inc. 's 2. 51β — meaning LIDR is approximately -4752% more volatile than IROQ relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AEye, Inc. (LIDR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 89% for IF Bancorp, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — CYN or LIDR or RBOT or IROQ or ZVIA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), AEye, Inc.
(LIDR) is pulling ahead at 15. 3% versus -40. 5% for Cyngn Inc. (CYN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: IF Bancorp, Inc. grew EPS 140. 4% year-over-year, compared to 21. 2% for Vicarious Surgical Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ZVIA leads at -0. 4% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
05Which has better profit margins — CYN or LIDR or RBOT or IROQ or ZVIA?
IF Bancorp, Inc.
(IROQ) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 9% net margin versus -145. 7% for AEye, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IROQ leads at 12. 2% versus -136. 2% for LIDR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IROQ leads at 54. 7%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
06Which pays a better dividend — CYN or LIDR or RBOT or IROQ or ZVIA?
In this comparison, IROQ (1.
5% yield) pays a dividend. CYN, LIDR, RBOT, ZVIA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is CYN or LIDR or RBOT or IROQ or ZVIA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, IF Bancorp, Inc.
(IROQ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 05), 1. 5% yield). Cyngn Inc. (CYN) carries a higher beta of 2. 18 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IROQ: +60. 1%, CYN: -100. 0%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
08What are the main differences between CYN and LIDR and RBOT and IROQ and ZVIA?
These companies operate in different sectors (CYN (Technology) and LIDR (Consumer Cyclical) and RBOT (Healthcare) and IROQ (Financial Services) and ZVIA (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CYN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LIDR is a small-cap high-growth stock; RBOT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IROQ is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ZVIA is a small-cap quality compounder stock. IROQ pays a dividend while CYN, LIDR, RBOT, ZVIA do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.