What does Cyabra do?
Cyabra, Inc. is a newly public software company selling narrative-intelligence and digital-trust tools to enterprises, governments, and research organizations. Rather than only counting mentions or sentiment, its platform analyzes online actors, amplification behavior, and narratives to distinguish authentic discussion from coordinated manipulation, fake profiles, impersonation, and synthetic media. The model is described on Cyabra’s official platform site and investor-relations overview.
Which customers and use cases matter?
Cyabra addresses information integrity. Communications teams can test whether backlash is organic or orchestrated; security teams can trace coordinated networks; public-sector users can monitor election, national-security, or public-trust threats; and brands can investigate impersonation, fraud narratives, and deepfakes. Research institutes and partners may also embed Cyabra’s analysis in broader intelligence workflows.
| Identity item | Company-specific answer | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Legal and listing identity | Cyabra, Inc.; Nasdaq: CYAB; Delaware parent with the operating business centered in Israel and the United States | The public company is a holding company whose principal asset is the operating subsidiary. |
| Business model | High-gross-margin software subscriptions, on-premises licenses, and managed-service reports | Recurring contracts can create visibility, but current scale is still very small. |
| Customer groups | Enterprises, governments, public figures, research institutes, communications teams, and security organizations | Sales cycles, procurement rules, and contract concentration differ sharply across these groups. |
| Geographic evidence | FY2024 revenue was $2.165M from Israel and $1.990M from the United States | The disclosed FY2024 mix was approximately 52.1% Israel and 47.9% United States. |
How does Cyabra make money?
Cyabra primarily sells hosted SaaS under non-refundable contracts lasting from several months to three years, with revenue recognized over the service period. Security-sensitive customers may buy two- to three-year on-premises licenses for their own networks. Cyabra also provides managed-service reports for defined investigations, recognizing that revenue when the deliverable transfers.
Why ARR leads reported revenue
Cyabra defines ARR as the annualized value of signed contracts lasting at least 12 months. ARR reached $7.0M at March 31, 2026, up 19% from $5.9M a year earlier, while Q1 2026 revenue grew 12%. Late-FY2025 bookings entered ARR before full revenue recognition, making ARR a leading indicator rather than a substitute for renewals, collections, or profitability.
| Revenue stream | Typical contract | Recognition pattern | Economic implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosted SaaS | Several months to three years | Ratable over the subscription term | Supports ARR and recurring revenue, but renewals remain essential. |
| On-premises license | Usually two to three years | Ratable while services are rendered | Useful for government or security-sensitive deployments with local hosting requirements. |
| Managed services | Report or package of reports | Point in time at delivery | Can open customer relationships, but is less recurring and more labor-dependent. |
| Partners and resellers | Cyabra embedded in a broader offering | Depends on the underlying customer contract | Potentially lowers distribution friction but creates reliance on partner execution. |
What does Cyabra’s latest quarter show?
The freshest operating report is the quarter ended March 31, 2026. Cyabra’s Q1 2026 earnings release and Form 10-Q show a business with improving gross economics but a cost base and capital structure that overwhelm current revenue.
Revenue grew, but transaction costs distorted the income statement
Q1 2026 cost of revenue was only $0.192M, nearly flat against $0.196M in Q1 2025 despite higher revenue. That lifted calculated gross margin to 86.4% from 84.4%. The operating loss, however, expanded because Q1 2026 included $5.217M of stock-based compensation and $3.438M of non-recurring business-combination costs. Excluding those items, adjusted EBITDA loss was still $3.155M, wider than $2.635M in Q1 2025. The underlying message is therefore mixed: delivery economics are attractive, but commercial scale is far below the operating-cost base.
| Metric | Q1 2026 | Q1 2025 | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.415M | $1.260M | New customers and expansion offset some non-renewals. |
| Gross profit | $1.223M | $1.064M | Server efficiencies helped gross profit grow faster than revenue. |
| R&D expense | $5.508M | $1.851M | Q1 2026 included $2.7M of R&D share-based compensation. |
| G&A expense | $6.284M | $1.515M | Public-company and transaction costs drove the increase. |
| Operating cash use | $(2.598)M | $(1.273)M | Cash burn doubled even though much of the GAAP loss was non-cash. |
Which strategic turning points shaped Cyabra?
Cyabra’s history explains the tension between an ambitious platform and a fragile balance sheet. Founder-led development became commercial deployment, followed by a SPAC transaction that delivered a listing while adding preferred securities, warrants, transaction costs, and compliance pressure.
From private software company to Nasdaq micro-cap
-
2017Dan Brahmy, Yossef Daar, and Ido Shraga co-founded the business. Founder continuity still shapes product, technology, and strategic decision-making.
-
2022Cyabra began offering its application to customers, establishing the commercial base for SaaS, licenses, and managed services.
-
FY2024Revenue increased 116.2% to $4.155M from $1.922M in FY2023, while ARR rose to $6.1M at December 31, 2024 from $3.5M one year earlier.
-
Jul. 2024Cyabra entered the original merger agreement with Trailblazer, beginning a prolonged path toward a U.S. public listing.
-
FY2025Revenue reached $5.707M, but operating cash use rose to $8.144M and year-end cash fell to $0.294M, increasing financing dependence.
-
Mar. 2026The business combination closed and CYAB began trading on Nasdaq. The closing Form 8-K also supplied the FY2025 operating financial statements.
-
May–Jun. 2026Cyabra reported Q1 2026, introduced new integrations and analysis modules, and signed an agreement valued above $0.5M in June 2026 with an international research institute.
-
Jul. 2026A $6.0M gross private placement closed, paired with proposed conversion or exchange of preferred securities and a large new warrant package.
Why narrative intelligence can create a defensible position
Cyabra’s potential moat is not patent-based: its pre-closing filing reported no patented products. Defensibility instead rests on trade secrets, model performance, analyst know-how, integrations, institutional credibility, and the cost of validating a replacement in sensitive environments.
The strongest resource is the evidence layer
A narrative-intelligence system becomes more useful when it can connect accounts, behaviors, content, images, sentiment, coordination patterns, and historical campaigns across platforms. Cyabra’s product strategy has expanded from detecting fake profiles into authenticity benchmarking, synthetic-media analysis, news-claims tracking, impersonation monitoring, and mitigation workflows. Integrations with established social-listening systems can make Cyabra an intelligence layer rather than a full replacement, reducing adoption friction and creating workflow switching costs.
What limits the moat?
The same architecture that creates value also creates dependencies. Cyabra uses APIs and data from social platforms and third parties. Changes to data structures, rate limits, authentication, anti-scraping measures, or platform policies can reduce coverage or raise costs. Unpatented software can be imitated, and larger competitors may bundle adjacent capabilities. Customers may also build internal tools. The moat is thus execution-based and must be renewed continuously through accuracy, breadth, trust, and customer outcomes.
Who competes with Cyabra, and where does it sit?
Cyabra’s pre-closing registration statement names Logically, Blackbird.AI, Alethea, VineSight, and Pyrra as competitors, while also identifying customers’ in-house capabilities as an alternative. The competitive field is broader than those names: social-listening vendors, media-intelligence platforms, cybersecurity providers, investigation firms, and large data platforms can all move into authenticity and narrative analysis. The company’s official registration statement is the most detailed source for this landscape.
Differentiation depends on depth, not market share claims
Cyabra does not disclose verified market share and is best viewed as an emerging specialist. It combines actor analysis, coordination detection, narrative tracking, synthetic-media detection, and mitigation. Partnerships can widen distribution, although they may leave the partner controlling the customer relationship.
| Competitive set | Primary pressure | Cyabra response |
|---|---|---|
| Specialist narrative-intelligence vendors | Comparable detection, attribution, and investigation features | Broaden the platform across authenticity, coordination, synthetic media, and mitigation. |
| Social-listening and media-intelligence platforms | Existing enterprise workflows and larger distribution | Integrate as an authenticity layer rather than insist on replacement. |
| Customer in-house teams | Internal data science, security, and intelligence capabilities | Offer faster deployment, specialist evidence, and cross-platform analysis. |
| Large cyber and analytics vendors | Capital, brand, bundled products, and procurement reach | Compete on specialist focus, agility, and institutional use cases. |
How strong are cash flow and the balance sheet?
Financial strength is Cyabra’s central constraint. FY2025 revenue was $5.707M, gross profit $4.841M, operating loss $11.970M, and operating cash use $8.144M. Cash was $0.294M at December 31, 2025. After the March transaction, Q1 2026 still ended with $3.122M of cash, $16.365M of current liabilities, and $12.048M of capital deficiency.
Cash conversion is more important than GAAP loss alone
Q1 2026 operating cash use of $2.598M was below the $10.770M net loss because of non-cash stock compensation and fair-value movements. Even so, burn near that pace would quickly consume the March cash balance. Management concluded that substantial doubt existed about continuing as a going concern without more funding.
July 2026 financing improved liquidity but increased dilution
On July 10, 2026, Cyabra closed a private placement with approximately $6.0M of gross proceeds for working capital and general corporate purposes. The July 2026 Form 8-K disclosed 1.175M common shares, pre-funded warrants for 12.644M shares, and two warrant series covering 13.819M shares each. Separate arrangements contemplated conversion of 35.648M preferred shares into common stock or equivalents and exchange of $10.660M of Series C preferred value, subject to stockholder approval. The financing may relieve near-term liquidity pressure, but the fully diluted share count and warrant overhang become major valuation variables.
| Financial indicator | Reported amount | Analytical reading |
|---|---|---|
| FY2025 gross margin | 84.8% | Strong software delivery economics before operating expenses. |
| FY2025 operating cash use | $(8.144)M | Burn exceeded FY2025 revenue and required external financing. |
| March 31, 2026 cash | $3.122M | Insufficient by itself for a long runway at Q1 2026 burn. |
| March 31, 2026 current liabilities | $16.365M | Large relative to current assets of $3.772M. |
| July 2026 financing | $6.0M gross proceeds | Adds working capital while materially expanding potential dilution. |
Who owns Cyabra, and how is it governed?
Cyabra has one-share-one-vote common stock, yet founders and directors retain meaningful influence. Immediately after the March 2026 closing, executive officers, directors, and affiliates beneficially owned about 20.6%. Dan Brahmy remained CEO and director, Yossef Daar chief product officer and director, and Ido Shraga chief technology officer.
Founder stakes align incentives but concentrate influence
| Holder or group | Beneficial ownership | Source period | Governance implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dan Brahmy | 711,548 shares; 5.1% | April 3, 2026 | CEO and director; the Schedule 13D combines common shares, vested RSUs, and exercisable options. |
| Ido Shraga | 710,549 shares; 5.1% | April 3, 2026 | CTO ownership aligns technology leadership with equity value. |
| Yossef Daar | 710,549 shares; 5.1% | April 3, 2026 | CPO and director influence product priorities and board decisions. |
| Executive officers, directors, affiliates | Approximately 20.6% | Immediately after March 2026 closing | The group can influence director elections, financing approvals, and major transactions. |
Board composition emphasizes security and institutional access
The board roster combines founders with backgrounds in national security, diplomacy, technology, enterprise operations, and public-company governance. That profile fits a company selling into governments and large institutions, where trust and networks can be commercially valuable. The counterpoint is that a micro-cap issuer with complex financings needs rigorous audit, capital-allocation, and dilution oversight just as much as strategic credibility.
Growth opportunities: distribution, public sector, and product depth
Online manipulation affects brands, elections, security, and crisis response, creating a market larger than Cyabra’s current revenue base. Growth can come from new enterprise and government contracts, module or geographic expansion within existing accounts, and partners that already reach media-intelligence or public-sector buyers.
Partnerships can convert specialist technology into scalable distribution
The July 2026 collaboration with Onclusive illustrates the partner thesis. Onclusive’s media-intelligence workflow can supply reach and customer context, while Cyabra adds authenticity and coordination analysis. The official collaboration announcement says the combined offering is designed to help communications teams distinguish genuine conversation from orchestrated activity. Similar relationships with public-sector and communications partners could reduce the cost of building a large direct-sales organization.
What risks could change Cyabra’s outlook?
Cyabra combines early-stage software execution, renewal risk, third-party data dependence, geopolitical exposure, operating losses, and a dilutive capital structure. Its filings disclose going-concern doubt, reliance on outside financing, no patented products, platform and API dependencies, competition, and non-renewal risk.
The biggest risk is the interaction between burn and dilution
Commercial progress can coexist with weaker common-stock economics. Repeated issuance of shares, pre-funded warrants, preferred stock, or common warrants before breakeven can prevent enterprise-value growth from translating into per-share value. The July 2026 financing improved liquidity but materially expanded potential common equivalents, so analysis must use fully diluted capitalization.
| Risk | Evidence | What to monitor |
|---|---|---|
| Going concern and liquidity | $3.122M cash at March 31, 2026 and $(2.598)M Q1 2026 operating cash flow | Cash runway, financing cadence, and quarterly operating burn. |
| Customer concentration | Five customers generated $2.222M, or approximately 53.5%, of FY2024 revenue | Large-customer renewals, diversification, and contract expansion. |
| Renewal risk | Q1 2026 growth was partly offset by customers that did not renew | ARR retention, churn, contract duration, and deferred revenue. |
| Platform and data access | Dependence on social-platform and third-party APIs | Coverage changes, rate limits, API costs, and legal restrictions. |
| Nasdaq compliance | June 2026 notices for the $1.00 minimum bid and $15.0M public-float-value rules | Compliance by December 7, 2026, transfer options, or a reverse split. |
| Dilution | July 2026 shares, pre-funded warrants, two common-warrant series, and preferred conversions | Stockholder approval, exercises, conversions, and fully diluted shares. |
On June 9, 2026, Cyabra received notices for failing the $1.00 minimum-bid and $15.0M public-float-value rules for 30 consecutive business days. Its listing-deficiency Form 8-K gives an initial deadline of December 7, 2026. The notice did not immediately delist CYAB but may shape financing or capital-structure decisions.
What matters for valuation and the final takeaway?
A conventional DCF is difficult because free cash flow is negative, the share count is unstable, and public reporting history is short. Model revenue through new customers, renewals, upsells, managed services, and partner bookings. High gross margin helps, but R&D, sales, public-company costs, and financing determine when operating leverage can emerge.
Which KPIs should a researcher monitor?
5-Year Financial Model
40+ Charts & Metrics
DCF & Multiple Valuation
Free Email Support
Disclaimer
All information, articles, and product details provided on this website are for general informational and educational purposes only. We do not claim any ownership over, nor do we intend to infringe upon, any trademarks, copyrights, logos, brand names, or other intellectual property mentioned or depicted on this site. Such intellectual property remains the property of its respective owners, and any references here are made solely for identification or informational purposes, without implying any affiliation, endorsement, or partnership.
We make no representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of any content or products presented. Nothing on this website should be construed as legal, tax, investment, financial, medical, or other professional advice. In addition, no part of this site—including articles or product references—constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, advertisement, or offer to buy or sell any securities, franchises, or other financial instruments, particularly in jurisdictions where such activity would be unlawful.
All content is of a general nature and may not address the specific circumstances of any individual or entity. It is not a substitute for professional advice or services. Any actions you take based on the information provided here are strictly at your own risk. You accept full responsibility for any decisions or outcomes arising from your use of this website and agree to release us from any liability in connection with your use of, or reliance upon, the content or products found herein.