Rythm Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Rythm Inc (RYM) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.
Key Findings: Rythm Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 51M vs -M combined for tracked competitors (100.0% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+80.5% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
- Scale: Rythm Inc ranks #25 of 45 companies by market capitalization in the Agricultural Production industry, holding 0.0% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Rythm Inc accounted for 100.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 100.0% a year earlier.
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
RYM Sales vs. its Competitors, Q2 2026
Rythm Inc generated 100.00 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 100.00 % a year earlier.
For context: the Agricultural Production industry grew revenue 16.7% year over year, combined, vs 1,027.4% for Rythm Inc. Rythm Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.00% to 0.02%, a gain of 0.02 percentage points.
Rythm Inc's Competitor Quality Breadth
Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).
| Entity | Profitable | Expanding | Above Industry Growth | Distressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rythm Inc | No | Yes | Yes | - |
| High-Confidence Competitors (4) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (9) | ||||
| Similar Growth & Profitability (8) | 28.60 % (2 of 7) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 100.00 % (8 of 8) | 25.00 % (2 of 8) |
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.
RYM Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
RYM Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors
RYM Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
RYM Stock Performance relative to Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors
Rythm Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Rythm Inc's Competitors Named by the Company
Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.| Competitor | Basis | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| Extraction Tech Solutions | Named by the company | 85% |
| Gavita | Named by the company | 85% |
| Heliospectra | Named by the company | 85% |
| Montel | Named by the company | 85% |
| Trym | Named by the company | 85% |
| AEssenceGrows | Named by the company | 85% |
| Fluence | Named by the company | 85% |
| Grownetics | Named by the company | 85% |
| Mach Technologies | Named by the company | 85% |
| Sprout AI | Named by the company | 85% |
| ExtractionTek Solutions | Named by the company | 85% |
| Grow Link | Named by the company | 85% |
| Hydrofarm | Named by the company | 85% |
| Pipp Horticulture | Named by the company | 85% |
| VividGro | Named by the company | 85% |
| Decimal Engineering | Named by the company | 85% |
| Galenja | Named by the company | 85% |
| Hawthorne | Named by the company | 85% |
| Maratek | Named by the company | 85% |
| Thrive Growing | Named by the company | 85% |
| Flourish | Named by the company | 85% |
| GrowGeneration | Named by the company | 85% |
| Low Temp Plates | Named by the company | 85% |
| Quantum Leaf | Named by the company | 85% |
| Whistler Technologies | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Rythm Inc's named competitors require a Commercial License.
Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.