Good morning, everyone. We'll get started here. Welcome. I'm Robbie Marcus, MedTech analyst at J.P. Morgan. Really happy to kick off the 2025 J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference with a first-time presenter, recent IPO, of Ceribell. Happy to introduce CEO Jane Chao. We'll do a presentation followed by some Q&A. Jane.
Good morning, everyone. It's very exciting to give our first J.P. Morgan presentation as a public company, and thank you all for getting up early to join us, so today, I will still walk through the overall Ceribell story. I will give you the overview of the company and then talk about the unmet need as well as the solution. We'll focus then switch up to our business model and our future pipeline. We'll wrap up the presentation with our 2025 areas of focus, so with that, our disclaimer. At the highest level, Ceribell invented a novel brain monitoring platform. It has the hardware, which you see here. I'll dive deeper later, that makes EEG signal acquisition very easy. It also has a software and an algorithm empowered by AI and machine learning. For now, it focuses on seizure detection.
However, down the road, with a combination of the hardware and AI, it could go way beyond seizure. Our current focus is on seizure detection in acute care. That's the ICU and the emergency department. So with that, seizure detection in ICU and ED in the U.S. alone is more than $2 billion market . And our future pipeline is also very exciting. And still in the near term, focus on acute care, but expand beyond seizure detection using the large EEG database we have, as well as our AI capacity to indications potentially including delirium, stroke, and others. And that would have a significant expansion of our TAM. Our Q3, through the end of September last year, the revenue run rate is about $69 million. And we're active in more than 500 hospitals in the U.S. And that translates to year-to-year 46% year-on-year growth rate.
And the company-wide gross margin is already at 86%. So now, switching gear, I mentioned we focus on seizure detection. Often, we think about seizure, we think about epilepsy. However, in the ICU, it's a very different type of seizure. And they are very common. A third of the neurological patients in the ICU have seizures. And that's a very high proportion. If you follow here, it could be patients who had a convulsive status epilepticus. Likely, if it's the first time you come to Ceribell presentations, likely the first time you heard the word status epilepticus, you're going to hear this over and over again. It's considered as a neuroemergency. It's defined as seizure lasting for five minutes or longer. And I'll show you later due to high mortality and morbidity. So a patient has a convulsive, meaning they are convulsing.
50% of these patients later would have non-convulsive, basically very little symptom, and also post-stroke, post-cardiac arrest, post-brain tumor, and even post-brain infection, and post-sepsis, so it goes from neurological patients to non-neurological patients. When you have 10%-30% of your ICU patients have seizures, you need to monitor a lot more, and to make things even more complex, the majority of these patients, up to 92%, when they have seizures, they have no obvious symptoms, so it could vary from they just get confused or they're in complete coma, so you have to have this device, EEG, that detects brain waves to diagnose seizure, and there's a lot of parallel between seizure and stroke. We often say time is brain for stroke. Our physicians often say time is brain as well for seizure in acute care setting, and here's why.
If a patient has a seizure and we delay that treatment, a patient seizes for 10 to 20 hours, mortality rate, as you see here, is 33%. A patient seizes more than 20 hours, mortality rate can go up to 85%. The gray bar you see here on top of the blue bar is even when patients survive, morbidity increases significantly. That can be permanent secondary brain injury, irreversible memory loss, and everything. You might wonder which modern ICU would leave a patient seized for 20 hours. Unfortunately, commonly in the hospitals in the United States, not even rural, even some teaching centers, which I walk you through. The good news, again, parallel to stroke is if you detect a seizure early, the treatment is readily available. It's a large dose of benzo.
If you treat the patient within the first 30 minutes of seizure onset, 80%, majority of these patients will respond. In most cases, seizure resolved for this patient. However, if you just delay that by one or two hours, the response rate drops very quickly. First-line medication is the patient's best chance to stop seizing. Again, early detection, early treatment is one of the most important factors for seizure management. You might ask, why don't we just empirically treat the patient? Because mortality and morbidity is so highly sensitive. The reason is the treatment often leads to suppression of the airway. That means physicians often have to intubate the patient and send to the ICU. Even with that, there is a large scale of empirical treatment happening.
To detect and manage seizure early, that means early EEG because it's the only way you can detect seizure in a reliable way. The guidelines already agree to it. Neurocritical Care Society, which really is the highest authority for this patient population because they master neuro ICU, more than 10 years ago, they already required to have EEG arrive on the bedside 15-60 minutes. Over the past 10 years, and especially more recent years, you start to see level one recommendation from American Heart Association. Post-cardiac arrest patient needs prompt EEG setup as well as interpretation. More recent years, you can see Stroke Society both rapid EEG for stroke management, post-stroke seizure management, both ischemic stroke as well as hemorrhagic strokes. Before Ceribell, most hospitals cannot be compliant to these guidelines.
If you look at the first guideline, not a single hospital globally can be compliant. The reason is that the standard of care for decades has been conventional EEG. Last year, I used to say this year happened to be the 100-year anniversary since EEG was invented. No major improvement has been made there. It was designed for detecting epilepsy in the outpatient clinics where a patient can wait for weeks and months. It's not designed for rapid response that's required in acute care setting where every minute counts for a patient's brain. It has some intrinsic bottlenecks preventing it from being rapid response. Number one, the device is very big. So to set it up, it's very cumbersome. You have to have an EEG technician to set it up. The majority of the hospitals have EEG technicians available.
Usually, it's a handful of them or a couple of them, Monday to Friday, 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., so that means three-quarters of the time, the majority of the hospitals have no EEG available, and even when EEG techs get to the bedside, it takes them about 30 to 40 minutes just to set up an EEG, so it takes a long time, and even after setup, EEG interpretation is highly specialized. Most neurologists do not know how to read EEG. Only epileptologists or neurophysiologists, which is a very small group, so large teaching centers, you usually have five to 10 of them. Typical community hospital usually have nobody or one or two specialized neurologists, so if you combine these bottlenecks together, it doesn't meet the current need, and one more barrier is seizure is dynamic. It's unlike stroke.
A patient can seize and stop five minutes and get back to seizure again. So it's critical for us to continuously monitor EEG, just like EKG. A lot of cardiac events are dynamic. So we need to continuously monitor. And currently, no hospital, very, very few hospitals, if I don't make an absolute statement, can afford to have neurologists to continuously monitor. So in reality, the supply of EEG is always hours and often days away from needing an EEG to getting an EEG. And the continuous reviewing of these EEG recordings is very rare. So now imagine if you were an intensivist or emergency physician. You are left with a few very suboptimal choices. Number one, you can wait. If you're worried this patient has seizure, you can order EEG and wait. That's somewhere between four hours to two days. And you remember the chart.
If a patient seizes one or two hours, it can increase mortality and morbidity. Therefore, often, they go to the second option, which is empirical treatment. They know it's going to wait for a time, but just in case, they will treat this patient, and often, they lead to unnecessary intubations, send patients to the ICU. Also, recent guidelines start to advise against empirical treatment. The third option is barely an option. You transfer patients out, which happens all the time, so it's very suboptimal. Then if you zoom out at the macro level, very likely before Ceribell, you already know sepsis and stroke and cardiac arrest. If you look at these patient populations, their mortality rate compared to status epilepticus, and hospitals have dozens of protocols on sepsis, stroke, and cardiac arrest.
Before Ceribell, there's almost no hospital that has a protocol for early detection, especially. That's not compliant with the guidelines. If you look at the age, that's shocking. This is not often the 80, 70-year-old. Many of these patients are very young. The average age of this patient population is 40 years old. This is the big picture. This is what we are trying to solve. Instead of waiting for EEG for hours and days, the Ceribell system allows setup within five minutes. We do not require an EEG technician. Nurses, residents, really, we can train any bedside providers and caretakers to set up Ceribell EEG in just a few hours, just a few minutes. It provides clinically equivalent signal quality. Setting up EEG doesn't help patients. It's the result that drives the treatment.
And so in a few minutes, our AI algorithm, we call it Clarity, would give the early detection. And also, because seizure is dynamic, so it's critical to continuously monitor, our AI doesn't stop and doesn't sleep, doesn't get tired. It will continue to monitor EEG during the entire recording every 10 seconds. So I'll walk you through in more details how we do that. The hardware system, this is what you see here. You have a recorder that's just similar size to your phone. And the headband is single-patient use. It's very intuitive. And this headband and this hardware is what allows nurses, after 10 minutes training, can set up EEG equivalent to conventional EEG. The data would then stream through hospital Wi-Fi to the Ceribell portal. And that's where neurologists can log in on their phone, iPad, or computer in real time to review EEG.
And believe it or not, this is often many neurologists for the first time can review their EEG on their phone. So when they're on call, they can just quickly say, "Hey, what's going on?" And these three components will largely replace the conventional EEG functionality. And the fourth component is brand new. And that's what they call Clarity. And that's the machine learning algorithm, optimized for seizure detection. So let's double-click on Clarity since it's the most new component compared to other EEG systems.
Clarity is an algorithm that looks at EEG every 10 seconds and then binary decides, is that 10-second EEG seizure or not. And the data is very complex, as you can see. On the left, you can see it's actually the raw EEG signal. So with that, Clarity would report the relevant information both on the bedside as well as to the neurologist.
You're all staring at this very complicated trace. So let me explain to you. The very complicated up and down wave, that's a raw EEG signal. And that's why it's very complicated to read, as you can probably appreciate. And it's also time-consuming. So this one page is 15 seconds EEG. For a neurologist to read a typical 10, 20-hour EEG, it's thousands of these pages.
So what Clarity does is at the bottom chart. That's only what Ceribell has, is the entire recording and then share to the neurologist, say, "If you look at when a patient has seizure, the seizure burden, which is a percentage of time patients spend during the past five minutes, will tell you where a patient seized." Without knowing the detail, you will see this is probably where you want to click the first 10 minutes. And that's exactly where a neurologist would go.
So this would significantly improve both the efficiency of how neurologists will review EEG instead of spending hours. They could be more efficient in triage in terms of where to go. And Clarity also sends the bedside signal, which is critical. Because on the bedside, that's when bedside physicians have to make life death decisions on, "Do I treat this patient? Do I not treat this patient?" So whenever a seizure burden passed 90%, which is equivalent to 4.5 minutes of seizure equivalent to status epilepticus, the device will turn red and start beeping.
So that's a lot of information. Let me walk you through a real patient case and hope you can see this. So the x-axis you see here is the entire EEG recording. The y-axis is the seizure burden. Again, it's the percentage of time patients spend in seizure during the past five minutes.
First thing first, in this recording, it started at 1:00 A.M. That means this patient, without Ceribell, in the majority of the hospital, would never get an EEG at 1:00 A.M. because the tech is usually not on site. Even when they're on site, they might take longer. And when you set up an EEG, usually, it takes hours before you get the neurologist to read it for you. In this case, in five minutes, the device turned red and started beeping, saying the patient is in status epilepticus, continuous seizure.
And the little pink needle here you see is not Photoshop dust. It's the bedside annotation. The nursing were able to treat the patient within five minutes. And if you remember the chart, not all the patients respond to the first-line medication. And without Ceribell, you would not know because likely this patient had comatose.
In this case, within about 20, 30 minutes, the device said, "Hey, patient didn't respond to the first-line medication," and again, within minutes, they were able to escalate the treatment, and you can see in real time at 3:00 A.M., patients start stopping seizing. However, continuous monitoring is critical because seizure is dynamic. In this case, patient returned to seizure at 4:30 A.M., and again, in the majority of the cases, this seizure would be missed, and by an hour case, that's not, and the bedside was able to, again, escalate the treatment again.
This is not an outlier case. This happens all the time, and this patient, in the majority of the hospital, you don't have to go to a rural area. Pick any hospital in San Francisco, likely would have seized out the entire night, if not the next day in the morning.
If you remember, a patient seizes 10 hours, 33% mortality. More than 20 hours, 85% mortality. We continue to develop our clinical evidence. This is one of the biggest publications we released last year. It's called SAFER trial. Retrospectively, we collected about 1,000 patients from big centers, Yale, Mass General, and University of New Mexico. About half of the patients are conventional EEG patients and half the patients on Ceribell. We started to see this very strong signal in ICU length of stay. It's about four days. Initially, even the PI, they're all independent. The four days ICU length of stay, their initial reaction is there must be a selection bias. It's too big a difference. We cut the data. They cut the data every single way.
In the end, the most reliable way, they carefully matched two cohort patients, carefully selected with similar sickness, diagnosis reason at admission, and age and level of seizure suspicion. If you compare about 120 patients, Ceribell patients stay in the ICU 4.1 days shorter. Then if you look at when patients from door to get to EEG, these are top teaching centers. Ceribell get to EEG about 19 hours faster. The biggest surprise in the positive way, even for myself, is the outcome data. We looked at the Modified Rankin Scale. Essentially, it measures the disability when patients get discharged. The conventional EEG arms, 76% of these patients were discharged with severe disability, which usually means they cannot go home. They have to go to a long-term care nursing facility. With Ceribell, again, they are very similar patients, 58%.
So that's an 18 percentage point difference, which means out of the same 100 patients, 18 out of 100 patients, Ceribell group, they were able to go home without severe disability. That's a big signal. Of course, it's association. But this has been largely endorsed by our, especially bedside physicians. This is one of the many examples here today. We have published 35 peer-reviewed journals and 75 abstracts.
And over and over again, we show physicians change their treatment decisions 40%-50% of the time when they use Ceribell. We show length of stay reduction. And we show we largely reduce the patient transfer due to lack of prompt EEG. I want to switch gears a little bit, talking about the potential competition. We created a category. And so we continuously monitor the competition. We see our biggest competition is from status quo, which is the conventional EEG.
However, as we're thinking about potential future competition, we have three main areas: our IP patents portfolio, one of the biggest EEG database and AI know-how, as well as our sticky business model with our customer base. So IP is pretty straightforward. We have 13 patents in the U.S. and another 12 pending. It covers from hardware as well as the algorithm and software development. One of our largest barriers is the database.
Because we have the hardware, so we have close to a million hours of EEG data already all through Ceribell. And not only are our users labeled it, we have, over the years, invested heavily with top KOLs, epileptologists in labeling these EEGs. And so we have developed a very in-depth know-how, both in signal processing as well as machine learning AI in this type of signal. This is a very unique time series EEG signal.
So a lot of off-the-shelf machine learning tools from the tech don't easily adapt here. So the in-house know-how is critical. And moving forward, we'll talk a little bit later, is using this AI know-how to extend beyond seizure, potential for delirium and stroke. And our customers also have a very high switch cost. This is not a typical OR tool that you can, when your rep is not there, your competition can train the physicians, the surgeons, and a couple of OR technicians to switch the gear.
When we launch an account, we work closely with our hospital in multiple departments, often from ICU to the ED to the step-down units to the rapid response team. And we partner with them, develop what's the right workflow, directly anchor back to Clarity performance and Clarity threshold.
And we train often hundreds of nurses and dozens of physicians and sometimes 100 physicians when we launch top teaching centers. So the Ceribell switch cost is very high for the hospital. And moving forward, we're also developing potential integration of the EHR, which would make the workflow even more streamlined and increase the competition. So let me switch gear and talk about our business model.
About a quarter of our revenue is from the software as well as the machine learning subscription. That's the SaaS model. It's recurring. It's about $5,000 per month. That's our listed price. The rest of our revenue came from our disposable headband. So we don't really have any capital sales. And these headbands are single-patient use, as I mentioned. So with this business model, we have created a very sticky usage pattern. We have very low attrition rate. We have very consistent reordering.
Therefore, as I mentioned earlier, create a strong high barrier of entry. Our current sales force has two arms. One arm is our account acquisition team, the territory managers. They focus on getting new accounts, so account acquisition. Then the second arm is our clinical account managers. They are more responsible to continue growing accounts once we are in because we might not launch them every single department yet. We might not have trained every single physician. We might not have integrated to the proper patient workflow yet. Jointly, these two forces actually launched sites together. The third unique part of our business model is the recurring revenue. As I mentioned earlier, the SaaS part is close to 100% recurring.
And even the disposable, even during the pandemic, when we lose the coverage, the usage has been rather stable and the high gross margin, as I mentioned before. We're only reporting to Q4 last year. As you can see, the entire history, as we can be reported, we don't have a single quarter that's lower than the previous quarter, despite all the rapid changing supply chain and macro environment. It's really a validation of both our business model, pricing model, as well as how sticky the usage pattern is.
So if you double-click on this revenue driver, there are two main drivers. The left is what the TM, territory managers, focus on. That's the account acquisition. As you can see, it has been growing very steadily and consistently over the past years. On the right side is the same -store growth. And that's the utilization per hospital.
The y-axis you see actually starts from zero. So we're not doing any gain. As you can see, at the end of 2021, about four years ago, we decided to also focus on same-store growth, not just get as many accounts as possible. During the past three years, we have roughly more than doubled our usage per account. So we have confidence that we have playbook on both ends. We'll continue to drive account acquisition as well as the same-store growth.
We got the question a lot, what is our TAM? I mentioned in the U.S., seizure detection alone is more than $2 billion. And here's why. We actually did a very bottom-up work closely with physicians and the database. And in the U.S., there are about 3 million patients who are at risk of seizure and status epilepticus in ICU and ED.
And in terms of number of facilities, we include short-term acute care, critical access, and freestanding EDs. And recently, we have gained access to the VA hospitals that further expanded our TAM. So we have, in the U.S., about 6,000 hospitals who will benefit from using Ceribell. So use our ASP. The estimation is more than $2 billion U.S. TAM.
So in summary, in terms of our future growth, in terms of revenue, on our core market, we'll continue to drive account acquisition as we have been doing during the entire commercialized history, drive utilization as we have been since we started our utilization strategy. One of the barriers still remains the awareness of status epilepticus, both how common it is as well as the severity and some of the recent guidelines. So we'll continue to drive the awareness, the disease state awareness, especially in the emergency department.
We are very committed to grow our clinical evidence and continue to improve our system product to further improve the user experience. The more medium-term growth area goes to potentially expand to OUS as well as some adjacent market. VA is the first time we proved that we did that. And also going beyond seizure. So let's talk about going beyond seizure. We see our future in three horizons. We are currently in the first horizon, which is to become standard of care for seizure management in the acute care setting. In the medium term, our goal is to make EEG a new vital sign. What does that mean? Brain remains a black box in the best ICUs and emergency departments in the United States or any country.
Let's say if you are a cardiac surgeon, you just finished a major cardiac surgery, and your patient didn't wake up within the time window you are expecting. Your patient could have a stroke. Your patient could have non-convulsive seizure. Or your patient could have just been overly sedated. Other than sending a patient to an urgent CT, which doesn't give you the full, or MRI, which doesn't give you the full answer, or doesn't provide any continuous monitoring, we don't really have a tool, so there are still a lot of guessing games, and EEG is one of the richest signals you can acquire on brain functionality non-invasively, and historically, because the hardware has been so limited, and AI is not where it is today.
So by eliminating the barrier of signal acquisition, building this large EEG database, use the state-of-the-art AI, we are very excited to potentially really see, harness what EEG can do. And so we could potentially see EEG could be a biomarker for detecting delirium, to detect stroke, to detect other neurological indications in the ICU. So that, just like we monitor a patient's heart with EKG, a patient has chest pain, a patient has altered mental status, any acute cognitive changes in ICU and ED, you put Ceribell on, we'll tell you, "Relax. Your patient is just overly sedated." Or, "Please rush the patient to the CT or CTA. Looks like your patient might have a stroke." Or, "Please initiate your anti-seizure medication path." In the third horizon, which is a longer term, it goes beyond the acute care setting.
It could be if you search any neurological or psychiatric disorder you think of, depression, OCD, ADHD, dementia, and you put EEG and biomarker, you Google it. I promise you, somewhere some labs have shown EEG can be a biomarker for that disease state. However, again, historically, because the data acquisition has been so limited, and this often requires sophisticated AI, that has not been possible, so again, that's our third horizon.
My last slide of my presentation is, so what are we going to do this year? We naturally will focus on the first and second horizon. For the first horizon, commercially, we'll continue to drive our account acquisition as well as same-store growth utilization. Since we recently acquired ATO from the VA system, we'll drive the VA adoption in 2025 as well. On the regulatory front, the main expansion we do here is to expand patient population.
Our hardware is approved or cleared for the entire age group. Clarity, which is our AI detection algorithm, is only approved for 18 years and above. We already submitted our pediatric Clarity 510(k). And our goal is to secure 510(k) clearance for pediatric population. We are also preparing to potentially submit FDA application for Neonate Clarity algorithm. And this would allow us to cover every single group, starting from NICU. On the second horizon, which is to make EEG a new vital sign, we already received a breakthrough designation on delirium. So we plan to submit an FDA application to get clearance or approval on delirium. So the submission would happen this year.
On the product front, we'll continue to both increase the user experience of our existing product, the seizure detection, and also we'll invest in developing potential algorithms to detect stroke, as well as the second-gen hardware that would enable and support this new indication expansion. With that, I won't repeat the last slide, but we are a device that has potentially saved many lives, saved the hospital a lot of money with a big TAM and even more opportunity to expand the TAM, recurring, predictable, high-quality revenue, and have established reimbursement. We didn't get a chance to cover today, as well as a very experienced leadership team that took the company so far. Thank you.
Great. So maybe we could start with the last slide. I think it was the first we've heard, delirium is going to be submitted in 2025. I think that's the first timeline we've gotten, so maybe talk about how delirium helps the selling experience of just the current indication and what another indication adds, not only to the clinical necessity, but the pitch to the hospital, the experience for the hospital, and just any other color you can add.
Yeah, so delirium is the most common neurological disorder in acute care setting, especially in the elderly patients. And currently, it's a nursing behavior test. It's difficult to do. It's unreliable. It's a spot check. And as we potentially launch delirium down the road, the synergy with seizure is huge for a couple of reasons. One, it's the same call points. It's the ICU and potentially, and two, it's the same patient population. Because the symptom is the same. The patient is altered. Cognitively, all of a sudden, they're confused.
So, to differentiate delirium and seizure itself has a natural synergy, so we do not have to establish a new sales force for it, and this is one more step for making EEG a new vital sign so that we can really help that side to understand what's going on with the patient's brain, what kind of failure, neurological failure that's happening.
To me, the clinical necessity seems really clear, but it's a new way of treating something that's been around forever. What's the pushback you get when you go into hospitals, and once you go through the process and you show them the product and the technology, what are some of the reasons that hospitals decide not to adopt Ceribell?
Are you talking about seizure or delirium?
Seizure right now.
Seizure right now. Yeah. I think for seizure management, when you think about it, the number one, I'll say, is the resistance to change, as you mentioned. This has been practiced for decades. For your context, probably, most emergency departments have never used the EEG before. Because when you wear the device for two hours or for four or five hours or two days, so imagine you are an ED physician. You were never trained in medical school.
You need EEG. You always think that's upstairs, and they were battling COVID, or they are recovering from COVID, and to tell the physicians and nurses, you have to completely add one more task. I think that's the biggest resistance we have. However, that's why we invest heavily in clinical evidence to show how this can benefit patients as well as the economic benefits, and I think overall, that's the first one.
The second, as all the hospitals are under financial pressure. So we have very strong health economics data. However, it's not a simple procedure to say, "Hey, the procedure is $5,000. It costs you $4,000." It's a more sophisticated DRG discussion, and that takes time.
You recently had an IPO at the end of 2024, raised a pretty substantial amount of cash. What's the priority usage for that? How are you taking this? Where should investors expect it to go? And how does that translate into better business results?
Yeah. Part of the investment you already see as we are committing to submit delirium, already submitted pediatric and investing heavily in the ongoing stroke trial, as well as developing the Neonate algorithm. So a big part of the proceeds will be used for product development. And equally important, we continue focusing on driving seizure product that involves both investing in sales as well as investing in clinical evidence and to build even stronger market positioning in seizure detection.
Jane, I have to ask. You didn't pre-announce fourth quarter, but any qualitative commentary you could give us on how you feel about exiting 2024 and entering 2025?
Yeah. As a first-time public company CEO, I was advised not to give too much color on Q4 and 2025. That's my candid answer. Sorry, Robbie.
I got to try. Maybe you could talk about the commercial organization. This is obviously a key component of selling, but it's not an exceptionally large organization as it stands today, and it's highly productive. So maybe spend a minute on the selling process and how you balance new account hunters and the account gatherers that build and drive utilization within hospitals.
Yeah. Our sales process often involves gaining clinical support from all the key physicians. That often involves the medical director of the ICU, as well as the neurology, because these are physicians who would read and who would order, and the nursing support, of course, is always critical. They are the first line on the bedside, and we also need to gain the budget owner support on the health economics, so that would take a months-long process to get everybody aligned.
Once we align there, as I mentioned earlier, we very much focus on the partnership between the two sales forces that they can launch the accounts, because we're not just introducing a device. We're introducing change. We're asking physicians to practice differently, change their habit over the two decades, so our sales are very committed to be a consultant, to be a partner for our customers.
Great. We're just about out of time. Maybe I could squeeze one last question in here. Obviously, very early in the maturity curve, you're growing very rapidly. Just how are you thinking over the long term balancing that hypergrowth with the drive towards profitability?
Yeah. I think the good news is with our gross margin, it's often within our control. So because with that gross margin, we have the luxury to potentially break even within a rather short period if the market condition requires to do so. However, currently, we are still focused on high growth, not growth at any cost, but we focus more growth on profitability. With that being said, we're confident with the money we have raised, we will reach break-even. And that's kind of how we're looking at the balance between growth and break-even.
Great. Well, we're out of time. Thanks, everybody, for joining. Thank you.