vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Ambow Education Holding Ltd. (AMBO) and BIT ORIGIN Ltd (BTOG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
BIT ORIGIN Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($2.9M vs $2.8M, roughly 1.0× Ambow Education Holding Ltd.). Ambow Education Holding Ltd. runs the higher net margin — 64.2% vs -244.4%, a 308.5% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Ambow Education Holding Ltd. is a China-focused education service provider that offers personalized learning solutions, professional career training programs, and K-12 after-school tutoring services. It partners with educational institutions and enterprises to deliver technology-integrated learning resources for learners of all age groups across mainland China.
Origin Systems, Inc. was an American video game developer based in Austin, Texas. It was founded on March 3, 1983, by Richard Garriott and his brother Robert. Origin is best known for their groundbreaking work in multiple genres of video games, such as the Ultima and Wing Commander series. The company was purchased by Electronic Arts in 1992.
AMBO vs BTOG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $2.8M | $2.9M |
| Net Profit | $1.8M | $-7.1M |
| Gross Margin | 53.3% | — |
| Operating Margin | 11.9% | -233.8% |
| Net Margin | 64.2% | -244.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 15.3% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 1343.1% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.03 | $-1.99 |
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.
| Q2 25 | $2.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.4M | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $2.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | $2.7M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $16.4M | — |
| Q2 25 | $1.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $123.0K | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-7.1M | ||
| Q2 23 | $-1.0M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-11.0M | — |
| Q2 25 | 53.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 55.6% | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 23 | 44.7% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | 9.2% | — |
| Q2 25 | 11.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -233.8% | ||
| Q2 23 | -27.7% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | -13.7% | — |
| Q2 25 | 64.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.1% | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | -244.4% | ||
| Q2 23 | -36.7% | — | ||
| Q2 22 | -67.1% | — |
| Q2 25 | $0.03 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.00 | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-1.99 | ||
| Q2 23 | $-0.02 | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $-0.05 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $4.1M | $6.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $8.6M | $9.0M |
| Total Assets | $23.2M | $13.5M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $4.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.6M | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $6.9M | ||
| Q2 23 | $6.9M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $9.2M | — |
| Q2 25 | $8.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $6.6M | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $9.0M | ||
| Q2 23 | $7.4M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $9.4M | — |
| Q2 25 | $23.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $17.6M | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $13.5M | ||
| Q2 23 | $28.8M | — | ||
| Q2 22 | $136.4M | — |
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 | — | $-4.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q4 23 | — | $-4.6M | ||
| Q2 23 | — | — | ||
| Q2 22 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
