Nur Ink: The Development Asset Is 35x Revenue, When Does It Start Working
The main article focused on slow commercialization. This follow-up isolates a sharper issue: how Nur Ink ends 2025 with an ₪11.4 million development asset against just ₪327 thousand of revenue, and what that says about loss quality and reliance on outside capital.
The main article focused on the pace of commercialization. This continuation isolates the layer that is easiest to miss: the gap between what hits the income statement and what is moved to the balance sheet as a development asset.
Four points matter before anything else:
- Intangible assets ended 2025 at NIS 11.428 million, almost 35x annual revenue.
- In 2025 the company capitalized NIS 3.673 million of development costs, slightly more than the NIS 3.581 million of net R&D expense recognized in profit and loss.
- About 84% of the intangible asset sits in products B and C, which still carry no amortization. In practice, most of the accounting value has not yet been tested through regular commercial use.
- The company is still buying time through capital markets. Cash stood at NIS 3.856 million at year-end, but by the report date it had already fallen to about NIS 1.6 million, and the operating runway depends on option exercises and shareholder funding support.
The key question here is not whether capitalization is permitted. Under IAS 38 it is, if the criteria are met, and the company says two out of five products qualify. The analytical question is different: does the balance sheet already reflect a revenue engine that is starting to work, or does it still mostly carry an accounting promise that runs far ahead of actual sales.
The Asset Is Already Larger Than the Business
The central gap is straightforward. Revenue in 2025 was just NIS 327 thousand, while the intangible asset climbed to NIS 11.428 million. For a development-stage company that does not automatically make the asset illegitimate, but it does mean the balance sheet is carrying an economic promise that has not yet been validated through commercial sales.
The company itself says the increase in sales in 2025 is not significant. That detail matters because this is not a case of a mature asset base being absorbed by an already scaled business. It is an asset that kept expanding in a year when revenue remained in the low hundreds of thousands of shekels.
The intangible asset note sharpens the point further. Product A is already being amortized, but most of the asset sits in products B and C, with no amortization at all.
| Intangible asset component | 2025 ending balance | 2025 additions | 2025 amortization | Analytical reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product A | 1,779 | 0 | 593 | Already in the amortization phase |
| Product B | 5,338 | 2,355 | 0 | Value still depends on future commercialization |
| Product C | 4,311 | 1,318 | 0 | Value still depends on future commercialization |
| Total | 11,428 | 3,673 | 593 | The asset is growing faster than the business |
Under the company’s accounting policy, amortization starts only when the asset is available for use. That means the NIS 9.649 million carried in products B and C without amortization implies that most of the balance-sheet value still has not crossed into a stage of proven commercial use. That is not automatically failure, but it does mean the largest line on the asset side is still not part of a proven revenue machine.
What Actually Improved in the Loss
At first glance, one could say operating loss improved, from NIS 9.568 million to NIS 8.806 million. But this is exactly where a superficial read becomes dangerous. Gross loss actually worsened, from NIS 995 thousand to NIS 1.287 million, because revenue still does not cover cost of sales. Even in 2025 the product base did not reach a stage where sales absorb production cost and amortization.
So where did the relative improvement come from. Mainly from two sources: an efficiency plan that began in the second half of 2024, and continued capitalization of development costs. The company says so directly. Net R&D expense fell by NIS 899 thousand to NIS 3.581 million, while in the same year NIS 3.673 million was moved to the balance sheet as an intangible asset. That is the core point of this continuation: in 2025 more development cost moved to the balance sheet than through the R&D line.
That does not mean the company is hiding an expense. It does mean the somewhat better profit and loss statement still does not reflect a more mature business economy. In reality, the company is still burning cash, still posting a gross loss, and still building the asset much faster than customers are validating it through revenue.
The point gets stronger when the second half is isolated. Revenue rose to NIS 231 thousand versus NIS 96 thousand in the first half, but even after that improvement the second half still produced a gross loss of NIS 548 thousand and a period loss of NIS 5.263 million. In other words, even the stronger half has not started to carry the development burden already sitting on the balance sheet.
There is one more layer. Cost of sales already includes NIS 593 thousand of amortization of a previously capitalized intangible asset. That means that even before products B and C start being amortized, the company as a whole is still not showing positive gross economics. If and when the rest of the asset begins flowing through cost of sales, the revenue bar will need to be higher, not lower.
The Balance-Sheet Issue Is Not Only Asset Size, It Is Who Funds the Waiting Period
This is the right place to use an all-in cash flexibility lens, meaning how much cash is left after actual cash uses, not just what the net loss line says. In 2025 the company used NIS 7.528 million in operating cash flow. At the same time it invested NIS 3.673 million in the intangible asset and paid NIS 541 thousand on lease obligations. Against that, financing cash flow contributed NIS 10.037 million, almost entirely from equity issuance.
The important line is not only year-end cash of NIS 3.856 million, but the broader liquid-resources picture. Cash plus short-term deposits fell from NIS 5.625 million at the end of 2024 to NIS 4.143 million at the end of 2025. That means that even after NIS 10.876 million of equity financing, the liquid cushion still shrank by about 26%. The reason year-end cash looks more comfortable than the underlying trend is that the company largely unwound its short-term deposit, from NIS 4.148 million to NIS 287 thousand.
Put differently, the intangible asset is not only much larger than revenue. It is also sitting on a company that funded the waiting period through equity raises, option exercises and liquidation of existing liquidity, not through cash generated by the product.
And this is before the most important update. By the report date, cash had already fallen to about NIS 1.6 million. The company states clearly that without additional capital raising and without additional revenue in 2026, existing cash is not enough for more than 12 months. Only after an early-exercise commitment by 8 option holders for about NIS 3.18 million, plus a funding commitment of up to NIS 4.5 million from the controlling shareholder and two additional shareholders, does management conclude that it has sufficient sources for 12 months from the approval date of the financial statements.
That is the crux of the issue. The balance sheet carries a large development asset, but the ability to keep carrying it still depends on capital markets and shareholders, not on customers. There is no bank debt and no credit line, which removes one type of risk. But it sharpens another: the economic proof of the asset still sits outside the business itself.
When Does the Asset Start Working
The real sign that the asset is starting to work will not be another year of ongoing capitalization and a slightly better operating loss. Three things need to happen together:
- Revenue has to move out of the hundreds-of-thousands range and into a scale that starts to justify an asset base above NIS 11 million.
- The largest assets on the balance sheet need to move from funded development into proven commercial use. Once that happens, amortization begins, and the market can test whether revenue actually carries the value.
- Outside financing has to become a temporary bridge rather than the main source of operating survival. As long as equity raises, options and shareholder commitments are the glue holding the picture together, it is hard to argue that the asset is already working in a business sense.
The more conservative read is that Nur Ink is still not at a stage where loss quality can be judged through the income statement alone. In a company like this, part of the story sits on the balance sheet. But the real test remains the old one: does the asset turn into revenue, does the revenue move into gross profit, and does gross profit begin replacing outside capital as the company’s source of oxygen.
Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.
The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.
The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.