vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Sprinklr, Inc. (CXM) and DIGI INTERNATIONAL INC (DGII). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Sprinklr, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($219.1M vs $122.5M, roughly 1.8× DIGI INTERNATIONAL INC). DIGI INTERNATIONAL INC runs the higher net margin — 9.6% vs 1.3%, a 8.2% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, DIGI INTERNATIONAL INC posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (17.9% vs 9.2%). DIGI INTERNATIONAL INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($35.2M vs $19.8M). Over the past eight quarters, DIGI INTERNATIONAL INC's revenue compounded faster (6.6% CAGR vs 6.2%).
Sprinklr is an American software company that develops a software as a service (SaaS) customer experience management (CXM) platform. The company's software, also called Sprinklr, combines different applications for social media marketing, social advertising, content management, collaboration, employee advocacy, customer care, social media research, and social media monitoring.
Digi International, Inc. is an American Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) technology company based in Hopkins, Minnesota. Founded in 1985, they were best known in the early 1990s as a manufacturer of multi-line serial data serial cards for PC clones, allowing these machines to run multi-line bulletin board systems (BBSes). As this market began to wind down with the rise of the internet in the late 1990s, Digi began to concentrate on network attached devices and industrial monitoring.
CXM vs DGII — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $219.1M | $122.5M |
| Net Profit | $2.9M | $11.7M |
| Gross Margin | 66.4% | 62.4% |
| Operating Margin | 5.3% | 13.3% |
| Net Margin | 1.3% | 9.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 9.2% | 17.9% |
| Net Profit YoY | -72.2% | 16.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.01 | $0.31 |
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 | $219.1M | $122.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $212.0M | $114.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $205.5M | $107.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $202.5M | $104.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $200.7M | $103.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $197.2M | $105.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $196.0M | $105.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $194.2M | $107.7M |
| Q4 25 | $2.9M | $11.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.6M | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.6M | $10.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $98.7M | $10.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $10.5M | $10.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8M | $11.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.6M | $9.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $21.1M | $4.0M |
| Q4 25 | 66.4% | 62.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 68.2% | 63.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 69.5% | 63.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 71.0% | 62.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 71.2% | 62.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 72.6% | 61.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 73.9% | 59.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 75.5% | 57.9% |
| Q4 25 | 5.3% | 13.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 7.7% | 12.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.9% | 13.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.2% | 13.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.9% | 12.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.0% | 14.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.9% | 12.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 9.5% | 7.6% |
| Q4 25 | 1.3% | 9.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.9% | 8.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.8% | 9.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 48.7% | 10.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 5.2% | 9.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.9% | 11.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 5.4% | 9.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.9% | 3.7% |
| Q4 25 | $0.01 | $0.31 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.05 | $0.26 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.01 | $0.27 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.35 | $0.28 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.04 | $0.27 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.01 | $0.32 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.04 | $0.26 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.07 | $0.11 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $189.6M | $30.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $135.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $558.1M | $649.2M |
| Total Assets | $1.1B | $918.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.21× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $189.6M | $30.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $125.4M | $21.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $126.4M | $20.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $145.3M | $26.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $93.2M | $25.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $119.1M | $27.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $126.8M | $28.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $164.0M | $23.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $135.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $159.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $40.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $70.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $95.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $123.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $151.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $171.8M |
| Q4 25 | $558.1M | $649.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $543.4M | $636.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $639.8M | $621.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $612.1M | $605.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $497.0M | $590.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $469.0M | $581.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $610.9M | $563.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $679.7M | $549.6M |
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $918.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $922.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $770.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $781.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $970.3M | $796.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $983.8M | $815.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $820.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.2B | $825.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.21× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.25× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.06× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.12× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.16× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.21× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.27× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.31× |
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 | $20.0M | $35.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $19.8M | $35.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 9.0% | 28.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.1% | 0.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 6.87× | 3.04× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $142.3M | $111.4M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $20.0M | $35.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $34.8M | $28.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $83.8M | $24.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.4M | $26.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.2M | $29.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $21.3M | $26.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $41.7M | $24.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $17.3M | $13.1M |
| Q4 25 | $19.8M | $35.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $34.4M | $27.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $83.5M | $22.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.6M | $25.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.2M | $29.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $19.8M | $25.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $39.2M | $24.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $15.2M | $12.5M |
| Q4 25 | 9.0% | 28.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 16.2% | 24.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 40.6% | 21.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.3% | 24.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4.1% | 28.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.1% | 24.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 20.0% | 23.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.9% | 11.6% |
| Q4 25 | 0.1% | 0.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.2% | 0.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.1% | 0.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.4% | 0.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.5% | 0.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.8% | 0.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.3% | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.1% | 0.5% |
| Q4 25 | 6.87× | 3.04× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.76× | 2.81× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.34× | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.05× | 2.50× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.88× | 2.95× | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.58× | 2.23× | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.92× | 2.57× | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.82× | 3.27× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CXM
| License And Service | $190.3M | 87% |
| Professional Services | $28.8M | 13% |
DGII
| Io T Productsand Services | $86.4M | 71% |
| Io T Solutions | $36.1M | 29% |
