Total comprehensive loss for Q4, $4.2 million again. This time, we compare it to a loss of $5.5 million in the previous quarter. Again, we ex out the onetime gain in fair value of derivative liability and the write-down of the inventory, so that loss would have been $4.2 million, and we compare that to $5.4 million for the previous quarter. So again, quarter-over-quarter, the loss is better. And again, the decrease is primarily due to professional fees and wage costs. Now on the final slide. If you just move it forward a bit. That’s great. You can see total assets decreased from $14.6 million to $8.3 million year-over-year, which is largely due to the deployment of cash and reduction of receivables and prepaids. The working capital deficit at the end of the year of $717,000 actually would have been a surplus of $3.5 million.
And shareholders’ equity would have been $4.6 million versus the $408,000 shown here, if we ex out the non-cash fair value of the derivative liability of $4.2 million. So just to remind everyone, the derivative liability comes from the fact that our functional currency is in Canadian and we have some U.S. dollar-denominated warrants, which the treatment is that it’s a liability and which is why we’re ex-ing it out just to kind of help you see the actual results. And you can see, we continue to have minimal debt. And as Cam stated at the outset cash balance at the end of the year was $3.1 million compared to $7.9 million a year-ago. And with that, I’ll pass it back to you, Cam.
Q – : Thanks, Paul. Appreciate it. What I’ll do now is I’m going to just go to the questions that came in and were forwarded to me. But as of note, if there is any questions, don’t feel – be afraid at all to reach out to me or to Rolly. I do my best to get back to everybody. It’s overwhelming at times. So sometimes it’s tough, and if I missed you, I apologize. But between Rolly and I, I think we come close to hitting about 100% of anybody that writes in and we certainly try to anyway. So first question is what percent of the company’s revenue is commercial versus defense? Right now, it would be – I’ll give an approximation. Right now, it would probably be based on the numbers that we just went through here, probably be about 85% commercial and 15% defense as just kind of like a very, very broad rule.
However, you can expect – and I have to qualify this by saying, in my opinion, that in the coming – this year, you’ll – basically, you’ll end up seeing this being 99% defense then – and maybe that’s a bit of an overstatement, but let’s call it 90% defense and the rest, commercial. And by way of example, one order that comes out of the customer base that we’re working with right now in the defense market, it would be multiple times the size of our revenue for the past number of years, so it would just absolutely dwarf the commercial numbers. And that’s where we’ve been putting our focus because that’s where the big win is for the shareholders. That’s where the big scale is. So it’s been a bit of a bold decision to do that, because we’ve not been scaling the commercial business, even though there’s really good demand there, and we’ve been focusing on getting the certifications and meeting the demand requirements on the military side.
So while it seems skewed right now on the commercial side, the reality is it’s incredibly skewed on the military side. So hopefully, that provides some clarity to that question. The second question that I’ve got here is you mentioned that you have all this demand and an increased capacity, yet we haven’t seen the new contracts and why? And so we’ve got the new plant built. We’re going through the, I’ll call it, the program of record certifications. All the rest of the clearances, everything that has to happen in order for the orders to start flowing. And there is very big moats around these orders. There’s an incredible amount of testing. There’s – it’s been 1.5 years, almost two years of really intense work with multiple areas of DoD in order to put these products through.
And it’s – and that’s why it’s just taken that much time. We’re not seeing anybody else scale at this point either. But I think it’s pretty well known that there are a few of other players out there who have well-known names, a couple of which, one in particular, are public. They’re on the verge of scaling as well. And we’re just starting to see the beginnings of that. So I think we’re on track with just the fact, where the purchasing cycle is for this right now. And again, we couldn’t be – I mean, I still kind of scratch my head every day at, not just the size, but at the capability and the requirements and the trust and the amount of exposure, the depth at which we’re able to – we’re being trusted. I don’t know, every morning I wake up incredibly proud of the team and the work that they do and the demonstrations and the tests that I’m not at, the feedback that I get and it’s a great story today.
I can’t be too specific, but I had a payload partner call up and mention a new opportunity with a new branch for their particular payload. And they said that what was interesting, this is the first time this happened, is that they wanted that payload, but they wanted to make sure that it was integrated with the Commander, because they want to make sure it’s the Commander that it’s flying on. And that to me, was just – that was an incredible moment and I think it’s indicative of what’s going to continue to unfold. So the third question here is, once again, we did a low ball equity raise. Is this finally the last time? Gosh, I hope so. I hope so. There are – we have multiple financing opportunities or options, excuse me, in front of us. I wish the markets weren’t the way they were.
