Logo

FTLF

FitLife Brands, Inc.

FTLF

FitLife Brands, Inc. • NASDAQ
$18.65 ▲ 0.65% (+0.12)
Market Cap $175.14 M
52w High $20.98
52w Low $9.83
Dividend Yield 0%
P/E 27.43
Volume 1.51K
Outstanding Shares 9.39M

Income Statement

Period Revenue Operating Expense Net Income Net Profit Margin Earnings Per Share EBITDA
Q3-2025 $23.485M ▲ $6.418M ▲ $921K ▼ 3.922% ▼ $0.1 ▼ $2.466M ▼
Q2-2025 $16.127M ▲ $4.386M ▲ $1.747M ▼ 10.833% ▼ $0.19 ▼ $2.617M ▼
Q1-2025 $15.936M ▲ $3.916M ▲ $2.018M ▼ 12.663% ▼ $0.22 $2.982M ▲
Q4-2024 $15.013M ▼ $3.331M ▼ $2.07M ▼ 13.788% ▲ $0.22 ▼ $2.956M ▼
Q3-2024 $15.977M $3.819M $2.126M 13.307% $0.23 $3.244M

Balance Statement

Period Cash & Short-term Total Assets Total Liabilities Total Equity
Q3-2025 $3.512M ▲ $109.984M ▲ $68.092M ▲ $41.892M ▲
Q2-2025 $1.53M ▼ $62.847M ▲ $21.928M ▼ $40.919M ▲
Q1-2025 $5.941M ▲ $62.193M ▲ $23.275M ▲ $38.918M ▲
Q4-2024 $4.468M ▼ $58.531M ▼ $22.405M ▼ $36.126M ▲
Q3-2024 $4.664M $58.587M $24.429M $34.158M

Cash Flow Statement

Period Net Income Cash From Operations Cash From Investing Cash From Financing Net Change Free Cash Flow
Q3-2025 $921K ▼ $3.672M ▲ $-37.508M ▼ $35.577M ▲ $1.927M ▲ $3.664M ▲
Q2-2025 $1.747M ▼ $1.195M ▼ $-5.005M ▼ $-702K ▲ $-4.409M ▼ $1.19M ▼
Q1-2025 $2.018M ▼ $2.328M ▲ $-24K ▼ $-866K ▲ $1.474M ▲ $2.304M ▲
Q4-2024 $2.07M ▼ $957K ▼ $0 $-1.108M ▲ $-200K ▼ $957K ▼
Q3-2024 $2.126M $2.047M $0 $-1.125M $985K $2.047M

Five-Year Company Overview

Income Statement

Income Statement FitLife’s income statement shows a small but steadily growing business that has been consistently profitable. Revenue has climbed over the past five years, and gross profit has grown along with it, suggesting the company has kept its pricing and costs under control. Operating income and EBITDA have been positive and relatively stable, pointing to disciplined expense management and an efficient, lean structure. Net income has stayed in positive territory, though earnings per share have moved around from year to year, which is common for a smaller company and can reflect things like share count changes, one‑time items, or timing of acquisitions. Overall, the trend is one of gradual growth with solid profitability rather than rapid but volatile expansion. The key takeaway: a small, niche consumer business that appears to be run with a focus on profitability and margin stability, not just top‑line growth.

Balance Sheet

Balance Sheet The balance sheet has expanded meaningfully over the last five years, especially on the asset and equity side, which lines up with the company’s growth and acquisition activity. Equity has grown steadily, signaling that profits are being retained and the company is building its financial base. Debt has appeared on the balance sheet in more recent years, but it remains modest relative to the company’s size, implying that leverage is being used in a controlled way, likely to support acquisitions or working capital rather than aggressive borrowing. Cash levels were healthier a few years ago and look lean in the most recent year, which is worth noting. Limited cash on hand can increase sensitivity to short‑term shocks or integration hiccups from acquisitions, even if overall assets and equity look solid. In short: a stronger, larger balance sheet than five years ago, but with tighter day‑to‑day liquidity that deserves attention.

Cash Flow

Cash Flow Cash flow mirrors the company’s asset‑light, disciplined approach. Capital spending is minimal, which fits with the outsourced manufacturing model and helps keep free cash flow close to operating cash flow. Operating cash flow has been positive in the most recent year after more muted or near‑flat levels before, indicating that recent growth and acquisitions are starting to convert more cleanly into cash. However, the history shows some lumpiness, which is not unusual for a smaller company that grows through deals and changes in channel mix. The main message: the business does not need heavy investment to operate, which supports free cash generation, but the pattern has not been perfectly smooth, so ongoing consistency in cash conversion is an important watchpoint—especially given the relatively low cash balance on the balance sheet.

Competitive Edge

Competitive Edge FitLife operates in the crowded nutritional supplements and wellness space, but it has carved out a defensible position through strategy rather than sheer scale. Its main advantages include an asset‑light model, strong focus on online direct‑to‑consumer sales, and a proven playbook for acquiring and turning around underperforming but recognizable brands like MusclePharm and Irwin Naturals. By plugging these brands into its lean, digital‑first platform, FitLife seeks to cut overhead, push more sales online, and improve margins. The “house of brands” approach also helps the company reach diverse customer segments, from sports nutrition to general wellness. That said, the industry is intensely competitive, dominated by many brands and low switching costs for consumers. FitLife’s smaller size compared to global giants, dependence on successful integration of acquisitions, and exposure to changing consumer preferences and regulation all remain real competitive risks. Overall, the company’s edge is operational and strategic—how it sells and manages brands—rather than simply owning the biggest name in the market.

Innovation and R&D

Innovation and R&D FitLife’s innovation is more about smart product design and business model execution than about heavy scientific research. On the product side, its standout technology is the patented time‑release system used in its ENERGIZE energy pills, designed to deliver sustained energy without the sharp spikes and crashes typical of many energy products. This gives FitLife a differentiated, defensible feature in at least one key product line, supported by clinical work. Beyond that, most innovation appears to be incremental: fine‑tuning formulas, packaging, and positioning across brands like Siren Labs and Metis Nutrition. The real “R&D engine” is arguably the integration playbook—acquiring brands with existing recognition, slimming and focusing their product ranges, and then relaunching them with better cost structures and stronger online presence. The opportunity is to keep applying this model to more acquired brands and new categories, but the trade‑off is less emphasis on breakthrough science and more reliance on marketing, execution, and smart dealmaking.

Summary

FitLife Brands looks like a lean, focused wellness company that has grown from a niche base into a more substantial player by staying profitable, outsourcing production, and leaning into online direct‑to‑consumer sales. Financially, revenue and profits have grown at a measured pace, with solid margins and a gradually stronger equity base. The balance sheet is healthier and larger than it was several years ago, though cash is now a bit tight and some debt has been taken on, which puts more pressure on consistent cash generation. Strategically, the company’s strength lies in its asset‑light model, disciplined acquisitions, and ability to revitalize existing brands rather than invent everything from scratch. Its patented time‑release technology in ENERGIZE adds some product differentiation, but the bulk of its moat is operational and commercial. Key uncertainties center on integration risk from acquisitions, the need to keep building online sales across acquired brands, intense competition in supplements, and the limited cash cushion. If FitLife continues to execute its acquisition and online growth strategy well, it has room to keep scaling its “house of brands,” but its smaller size and reliance on execution discipline remain important factors to watch.

NEWS

November 13, 2025 · 7:30 AM UTC

FitLife Brands Announces Third Quarter 2025 Results

Read more

November 7, 2025 · 4:00 PM UTC

FitLife Brands Announces Third Quarter Earnings Call

Read more