/
The Company was formed in Nevada in August 30, 2002 as IntelSource Group, Inc. and began operations in 2003. The Company began acting as Electro Medical Technologies, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company on November 9, 2010, after the merger with ElectroMedical Technologies, LLC, a Nevada Company.
$0.00
+$0.00 (+0.00%)
EOD Jul 17, 2026
The business is unprofitable at the operating level (-153.09% margin). The thesis depends entirely on whether and when it reaches sustainable profitability.
Revenue grew 17.3%, still solid. Margins contracted 13.6pp, which offsets some of the top-line progress.
ROIC dropped from -184.35% to -288.37%, capital efficiency is deteriorating. Negative free cash flow of -$2M. The business is consuming cash, not generating it.
Based on TTM earnings · Diluted shares
Profitability & Returns
Revenue (TTM)
$922K
▲ +17.3% YoY
Net Income (TTM)
-$2M
▲ +23.9% YoY
Op. Margin
-109.62%
▼ -13.6pp YoY
ROIC
-74.11%
▼ -104.0pp YoY
Cash Flow & Balance Sheet
FCF (FY)
-$2M
Op. Cash Flow (TTM)
-$131K
▼ -83.3% YoY
Net Debt
$97K
Cash & Equiv.
$35K
3Y CAGR: +22.3%
Continue Research
Electromedical Technologies (EMED)'s valuation is best read against its own history, its peers, and the growth its price implies. A high multiple is not the same as overvalued: fast-growing, high-quality businesses can deserve a premium. See the general approach in how to tell if a stock is overvalued.
On quality, Electromedical Technologies scores 26/100 on Intrinsiqq's quality scorecard (a lower-quality business on these measures), weighing growth, margins, returns on capital, share count, and balance-sheet strength. All figures are computed from SEC filings; read the full . This is analysis, not investment advice.
Electromedical Technologies scores 26 out of 100 on Intrinsiqq's quality score, a weighted blend of 6 metrics each scored 0 to 100, which makes it a lower-quality business on these measures. Recent fundamentals include a -109.6% operating margin and a -74.1% return on invested capital. The score weighs revenue and free-cash-flow growth, operating margins, return on invested capital, share-count change, and balance-sheet strength, all computed from SEC filings, not opinion. Because valuation only means something relative to quality, the full metric-by-metric breakdown is on the quality scorecard.
That depends on valuation and quality together, not either alone. you should weigh EMED's valuation and scores 26/100 on quality (lower-quality). A cheap price is only a bargain if the business is durable, and a premium can be justified by genuine quality, so the two questions, "is it cheap?" and "is it good?", only make sense side by side. Read the valuation against the quality scorecard, run the DCF on your own assumptions, and decide for yourself. This is analysis from SEC filings, not investment advice.