Logo

BGMS

Bio Green Med Solution, Inc.

BGMS

Bio Green Med Solution, Inc. NASDAQ
$1.51 0.67% (+0.01)

Market Cap $2.91 M
52w High $213.60
52w Low $1.16
Dividend Yield 0%
P/E -0.1
Volume 18.99K
Outstanding Shares 1.93M

Income Statement

Period Revenue Operating Expense Net Income Net Profit Margin Earnings Per Share EBITDA
Q3-2025 $81K $1.009M $-988K -1.22K% $-1.31 $-990.5K
Q2-2025 $0 $1.316M $-1.318M 0% $-0.84 $-1.315M
Q1-2025 $0 $5.036M $-81K 0% $-0.094 $-5.036M
Q4-2024 $0 $1.828M $-3.052M 0% $-79.2 $-1.885M
Q3-2024 $10K $2.187M $-1.957M -19.57K% $-43.2 $-2.176M

Balance Statement

Period Cash & Short-term Total Assets Total Liabilities Total Equity
Q3-2025 $3.838M $8.158M $1.062M $7.096M
Q2-2025 $4.275M $4.401M $770K $3.631M
Q1-2025 $3.45M $3.734M $672K $3.062M
Q4-2024 $3.137M $4.094M $6.268M $-2.174M
Q3-2024 $2.982M $5.381M $6.351M $-970K

Cash Flow Statement

Period Net Income Cash From Operations Cash From Investing Cash From Financing Net Change Free Cash Flow
Q3-2025 $-988K $-434K $0 $-3K $-4.275M $-434K
Q2-2025 $-1.318M $-1.056M $0 $1.88M $825K $-1.056M
Q1-2025 $-81K $-3.247M $0 $3.646M $313K $-3.247M
Q4-2024 $-3.052M $-1.356M $0 $1.613M $155K $-1.356M
Q3-2024 $-1.957M $-3.067M $0 $-1K $-3.018M $-3.067M

Five-Year Company Overview

Income Statement

Income Statement BGMS is essentially a pre‑revenue company on the reported historical numbers. For several years it has generated no meaningful sales and has run at a steady, though relatively small, operating loss. The losses look more like the burn of a lean development‑stage business than that of a scaled operating company. Earnings per share look extreme mainly because they are being spread over a very small base and against almost no revenue. The key point: the legacy financials reflect a company still in build‑out and transition mode, not one with established, recurring income streams.


Balance Sheet

Balance Sheet The balance sheet has been very light, with only modest assets and no financial debt historically. Equity and cash cushions have been thin, implying dependence on external funding or transactions to support operations. The stated improvement in cash more recently, helped by asset sales and the Fitters acquisition, suggests a better liquidity position than the raw historical figures alone would indicate. Even so, the company remains financially small, and its ability to invest will likely stay constrained until its new fire safety business and any future pharma collaborations begin to contribute more meaningfully.


Cash Flow

Cash Flow Cash flow has consistently been negative, driven by operating expenses rather than heavy investment in physical assets. In other words, most of the cash burn is going into people, R&D, and overhead, not factories or equipment. With capital spending effectively negligible, free cash flow has tracked operating cash flow closely and has remained in the red. Management’s statement that current resources should fund activity into the near future reduces short‑term funding pressure, but over time the business will still need either growing cash inflows from Fitters, successful partnering in pharma, or additional capital raises to sustain operations and any expansion plans.


Competitive Edge

Competitive Edge BGMS now combines two very different positions: a niche oncology drug developer and a long‑established Malaysian fire safety provider. In biopharma, its remaining drug candidate, fadraciclib, competes in a crowded field of targeted cancer therapies where larger, better‑funded rivals are active; here, the company’s edge rests mainly on specific intellectual property and scientific know‑how, but with high scientific and regulatory risk. In fire safety, Fitters holds a more tangible moat: a recognized brand, broad product range, and “one‑stop” project capability in its home market, supported by long relationships with customers and regulators. The challenge is that these two positions do not naturally reinforce each other, so execution risk around strategy, focus, and management attention is significant.


Innovation and R&D

Innovation and R&D Historically, BGMS’s innovation engine was its oncology research platform, which produced advanced cell‑cycle–targeting drug candidates. The sale of one of these programs and the reported drop in R&D spending indicate a shift away from a broad pipeline toward a leaner, more selective approach centered on fadraciclib. This reduces cash burn but also narrows the company’s future upside in pharmaceuticals to a smaller set of bets. On the industrial side, Fitters is more of an applied‑engineering and solutions business than a deep R&D outfit, with innovation focused on system integration, certifications, and service breadth. There is potential to introduce more technology‑driven offerings, such as connected monitoring or advanced suppression systems, but that appears more aspirational than fully realized at this stage.


Summary

BGMS is in the middle of a major transformation: from a single‑track, loss‑making cancer‑drug developer into a diversified group anchored by a traditional, revenue‑generating fire safety business. The historical numbers show a tiny, pre‑revenue biotech burning cash with a very light balance sheet, while the narrative and recent deals point toward a future with a more stable, industrial core and a slimmed‑down pharma effort. The opportunity lies in successfully harnessing Fitters’ established market position and cash generation while carefully preserving the upside of fadraciclib without overextending financially. The main risks are strategic complexity, integration of very different cultures and business models, continued operating losses, and dependence on external funding or partnerships if growth or trial outcomes fall short. BGMS today is best viewed as a small, transitional platform whose ultimate shape and economic profile are still being defined by management’s execution over the next few years.