vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Digital Turbine, Inc. (APPS) and Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc. (HPP). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($256.0M vs $151.4M, roughly 1.7× Digital Turbine, Inc.). Digital Turbine, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 3.4% vs -109.4%, a 112.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Hudson Pacific Properties, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (22.1% vs 12.4%). Over the past eight quarters, Digital Turbine, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (16.2% CAGR vs 9.4%).
Digital Turbine, Inc. is a global ad technology company that provides end-to-end mobile app monetization, user acquisition, and targeted advertising solutions. It partners with mobile network operators, original equipment manufacturers, and app developers to deliver seamless, contextually relevant app experiences and ad engagements to end users across North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific, serving core segments of telecom, mobile tech and consumer app industries.
Hudson Pacific Properties is a real estate investment trust with 15.8 million square feet of office buildings, 1.5 million square feet of sound stages, and undeveloped rights for 3 million square feet of additional commercial property. Its properties are on the West Coast of the United States and Vancouver. It is organized in Maryland and headquartered in Los Angeles. It is the largest independent operator of sound stages in Los Angeles.
APPS vs HPP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $151.4M | $256.0M |
| Net Profit | $5.1M | $-280.2M |
| Gross Margin | 57.4% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | 14.3% | -109.8% |
| Net Margin | 3.4% | -109.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 12.4% | 22.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 122.1% | -61.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.03 | $-11.57 |
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.
| Q4 25 | $151.4M | $256.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $140.4M | $186.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $130.9M | $190.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $119.2M | $198.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $134.6M | $209.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $118.7M | $200.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $118.0M | $218.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $112.2M | $214.0M |
| Q4 25 | $5.1M | $-280.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-21.4M | $-144.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-14.1M | $-87.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-18.8M | $-80.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-23.1M | $-173.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-25.0M | $-107.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-25.2M | $-47.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-236.5M | $-53.4M |
| Q4 25 | 57.4% | 60.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 55.1% | 44.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 55.6% | 43.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 55.4% | 42.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 48.0% | 44.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 52.6% | 42.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 52.7% | 48.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 52.3% | 48.6% |
| Q4 25 | 14.3% | -109.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.7% | -77.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -3.6% | -46.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -9.8% | -40.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | -9.5% | -83.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -11.4% | -52.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -13.6% | -21.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -185.2% | -24.9% |
| Q4 25 | 3.4% | -109.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | -15.2% | -77.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -10.8% | -46.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -15.8% | -40.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -17.2% | -82.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | -21.0% | -53.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | -21.3% | -21.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | -210.7% | -24.9% |
| Q4 25 | $0.03 | $-11.57 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.20 | $-0.30 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.13 | $-0.41 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.18 | $-0.53 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.22 | $-1.19 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.24 | $-0.69 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.25 | $-0.33 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-2.33 | $-0.37 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $40.2M | $138.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $355.0M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $194.6M | $3.0B |
| Total Assets | $858.2M | $7.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.82× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $40.2M | $138.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $38.8M | $190.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $33.4M | $236.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $39.4M | $86.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $34.6M | $63.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $32.1M | $90.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $35.0M | $78.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $32.9M | $114.3M |
| Q4 25 | $355.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $396.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $400.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $408.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $408.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $407.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $393.8M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $383.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | $194.6M | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $148.1M | $3.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $152.3M | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $154.0M | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $163.6M | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $182.4M | $3.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $196.0M | $3.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $213.9M | $3.2B |
| Q4 25 | $858.2M | $7.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $818.7M | $7.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | $818.4M | $8.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $812.9M | $8.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $839.7M | $8.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $844.5M | $8.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $860.2M | $8.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | $865.5M | $8.3B |
| Q4 25 | 1.82× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.68× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.63× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.65× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.50× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.24× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.01× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.79× | — |
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 | $14.2M | $121.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 2.78× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $14.2M | $121.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.5M | $33.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.8M | $-2.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.9M | $30.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.4M | $164.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-8.7M | $63.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.4M | $35.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $28.7M | $65.1M |
| Q4 25 | 2.78× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
APPS
| On Device Solutions | $99.6M | 66% |
| App Growth Platform | $52.6M | 35% |
HPP
| Core Office | $217.1M | 85% |
| Studio Segment | $21.8M | 9% |
| Ancillary Revenue | $20.2M | 8% |
| Chargebacks | $3.3M | 1% |
