vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AMBARELLA INC (AMBA) and Cadence Design Systems (CDNS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Cadence Design Systems is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.5B vs $108.5M, roughly 13.6× AMBARELLA INC). Cadence Design Systems runs the higher net margin — 22.8% vs -13.9%, a 36.7% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AMBARELLA INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (31.2% vs 14.1%). Cadence Design Systems produced more free cash flow last quarter ($307.0M vs $31.4M). Over the past eight quarters, AMBARELLA INC's revenue compounded faster (45.0% CAGR vs 17.9%).
Ambarella, Inc. is an American fabless semiconductor design company, focusing on low-power, high-definition (HD) and Ultra HD video compression, image processing, and computer vision processors. Ambarella's products are used in a wide variety of human and computer vision applications, including video security, advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), electronic mirror, drive recorder, driver and in-cabin monitoring, autonomous driving, and robotics applications. Ambarella's system on chips ...
Cadence Design Systems, Inc. is an American multinational technology and computational software company headquartered in San Jose, California. Initially specialized in electronic design automation (EDA) software for the semiconductor industry, currently the company makes software and hardware for designing products such as integrated circuits, systems on chips (SoCs), printed circuit boards, and pharmaceutical drugs, also licensing intellectual property for the electronics, aerospace, defense an...
AMBA vs CDNS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $108.5M | $1.5B |
| Net Profit | $-15.1M | $335.7M |
| Gross Margin | 59.6% | — |
| Operating Margin | -15.0% | 29.3% |
| Net Margin | -13.9% | 22.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 31.2% | 14.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 37.2% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.35 | $1.23 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q1 26 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | $108.5M | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $95.5M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $85.9M | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $84.0M | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $82.7M | $1.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $63.7M | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $54.5M | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | $335.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-15.1M | $388.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-20.0M | $287.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-24.3M | $160.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-20.2M | $273.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-24.1M | $340.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-34.9M | $238.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-37.9M | $229.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 59.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 58.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 60.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 60.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 60.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 60.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 60.9% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | 29.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | -15.0% | 32.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | -23.0% | 31.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -30.1% | 19.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -30.2% | 29.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -30.9% | 33.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -56.9% | 28.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -72.4% | 27.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | 22.8% | ||
| Q4 25 | -13.9% | 27.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -20.9% | 21.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -28.3% | 12.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -24.1% | 22.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | -29.1% | 25.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | -54.8% | 19.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -69.6% | 21.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.23 | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.35 | $1.42 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.47 | $1.05 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.58 | $0.59 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.48 | $1.00 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.58 | $1.23 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.85 | $0.87 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.93 | $0.84 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $174.1M | $1.4B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $2.5B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $590.1M | $6.6B |
| Total Assets | $751.9M | $12.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.38× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $174.1M | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $142.7M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $141.3M | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $144.6M | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $127.1M | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $153.9M | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | $131.8M | $1.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.5B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $6.6B | ||
| Q4 25 | $590.1M | $5.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $576.5M | $5.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $572.7M | $5.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $561.4M | $4.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $554.3M | $4.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $547.6M | $4.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $555.4M | $4.3B |
| Q1 26 | — | $12.1B | ||
| Q4 25 | $751.9M | $10.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $706.4M | $9.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $701.9M | $9.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $689.0M | $9.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $670.8M | $9.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $650.3M | $9.2B | ||
| Q2 24 | $638.7M | $7.2B |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.38× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $34.3M | $355.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $31.4M | $307.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 29.0% | 20.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.7% | 9.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.06× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $64.3M | $1.4B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $355.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | $34.3M | $553.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.5M | $310.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $14.8M | $377.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $25.4M | $487.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.6M | $441.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $16.7M | $410.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-15.0M | $156.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $307.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $31.4M | $512.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4M | $277.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $10.2M | $333.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.2M | $464.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.1M | $404.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $14.2M | $383.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-16.1M | $126.8M |
| Q1 26 | — | 20.8% | ||
| Q4 25 | 29.0% | 35.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.4% | 20.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 11.9% | 26.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 25.3% | 37.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.0% | 29.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.2% | 31.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | -29.5% | 12.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | 9.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | 2.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.3% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.3% | 3.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.0% | 1.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.0% | 2.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.0% | 2.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.1% | 2.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 1.06× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.43× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.08× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.36× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.78× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.30× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.72× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.68× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
AMBA
| TW | $76.0M | 70% |
| Asia Pacific Other Than Taiwan | $20.2M | 19% |
| North America Other Than United States | $7.4M | 7% |
| Other | $5.0M | 5% |
CDNS
| Product and Maintenance | $1.3B | 92% |
| Services | $125.0M | 8% |
