vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AppLovin Corp (APP) and Gen Digital (GEN), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
AppLovin Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.3B vs $1.2B, roughly 1.1× Gen Digital). AppLovin Corp runs the higher net margin — 82.7% vs 15.5%, a 67.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. Over the past eight quarters, Gen Digital's revenue compounded faster (13.2% CAGR vs 12.2%).
AppLovin Corporation is an American mobile technology company headquartered in Palo Alto, California. Founded in 2012, the company helps developers market, monetize, analyze and publish their apps through its mobile advertising, marketing, and analytics platforms, SSP MAX; DSP AppDiscovery; and SparkLabs creative studio. The company also invests in various mobile game publishers.
Gen Digital Inc. is a multinational software company co-headquartered in both Tempe, Arizona (USA) and Prague, Czech Republic (EU). The company provides cybersecurity software, financial technology, and services. Gen is a Fortune 500 company and a member of the S&P 500 stock-market index. It is listed at both NASDAQ and Prague Stock Exchange. Its portfolio includes Norton, Avast, LifeLock, Avira, AVG, ReputationDefender, MoneyLion and CCleaner.
APP vs GEN — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.3B | $1.2B |
| Net Profit | $1.1B | $192.0M |
| Gross Margin | 95.2% | 78.4% |
| Operating Margin | — | 34.9% |
| Net Margin | 82.7% | 15.5% |
| Revenue YoY | -2.9% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 84.0% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $3.24 | $0.31 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q1 26 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.4B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.5B | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $986.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $974.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $965.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $192.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $134.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $835.5M | $135.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $819.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $576.4M | $142.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $599.2M | $159.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $434.4M | $161.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $310.0M | $181.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 78.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | 95.2% | 78.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 87.6% | 78.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 87.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 81.7% | 80.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 76.7% | 80.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 77.5% | 80.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 73.8% | 80.3% |
| Q1 26 | — | 34.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 35.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 76.8% | 35.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 76.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 44.7% | 41.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 44.3% | 37.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 44.6% | 41.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 36.2% | 43.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | 15.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 82.7% | 11.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 59.5% | 10.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 65.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 38.8% | 14.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 43.6% | 16.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 36.3% | 16.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 28.7% | 18.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.31 | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.24 | $0.21 | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.45 | $0.22 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.39 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.67 | $0.22 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.72 | $0.26 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.25 | $0.26 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.89 | $0.29 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.5B | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $3.5B | $8.4B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.1B | $2.3B |
| Total Assets | $7.3B | $15.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.65× | 3.61× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $551.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $741.4M | $883.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $567.6M | $737.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $460.4M | $644.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $8.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | $8.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $8.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $8.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.5B | $8.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $8.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $8.5B |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.1B | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $575.4M | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $938.2M | $2.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $814.8M | $2.0B |
| Q1 26 | — | $15.8B | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.3B | $16.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.3B | $16.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.0B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.7B | $15.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.9B | $15.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.4B | $15.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $5.3B | $15.4B |
| Q1 26 | — | 3.61× | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.65× | 3.54× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.75× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 3.64× | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.22× | 3.94× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 4.06× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 4.33× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $1.3B | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 1.19× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $541.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $409.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $772.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $831.7M | $473.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $701.0M | $326.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $550.7M | $158.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $454.5M | $264.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $535.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $405.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $470.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $318.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $156.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $262.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 43.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 32.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 46.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 32.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 16.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 27.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.19× | 4.04× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.26× | 3.03× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.94× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.44× | 3.33× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.17× | 2.05× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.27× | 0.98× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.47× | 1.46× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
