vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of CyberArk Software Ltd. (CYBR) and Grab Holdings Ltd (GRAB). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Grab Holdings Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.5B vs $988.5M, roughly 1.5× CyberArk Software Ltd.). Grab Holdings Ltd runs the higher net margin — 1.8% vs -13.1%, a 14.9% gap on every dollar of revenue.
CyberArk Software Ltd. is an Israeli publicly traded information security company offering identity management. The company's technology is utilized primarily in the financial services, energy, retail, healthcare and government markets. CyberArk is headquartered in Petach-Tikva. The company also has offices throughout the Americas, EMEA, Asia Pacific and Japan.
Grab Holdings Inc. is a Singaporean multinational technology company headquartered in one-north, Singapore. It is the developer of a super-app for ride-hailing, food delivery, and digital payment services on mobile devices. It operates in Singapore, Malaysia, Cambodia, Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam.
CYBR vs GRAB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $988.5M | $1.5B |
| Net Profit | $-129.8M | $26.0M |
| Gross Margin | 76.0% | 43.1% |
| Operating Margin | -10.8% | -2.5% |
| Net Margin | -13.1% | 1.8% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.01 |
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.
| Q3 25 | $988.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $645.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $317.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $446.3M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $221.6M | — |
| Q3 25 | $-129.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-79.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $11.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $26.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-7.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $5.5M | — |
| Q3 25 | 76.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 75.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 76.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 43.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 80.4% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 80.9% | — |
| Q3 25 | -10.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -8.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -6.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -2.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | -6.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.9% | — |
| Q3 25 | -13.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -12.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.7% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.5% | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.01 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $523.6M | $3.0B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.3B | $6.4B |
| Total Assets | $4.6B | $9.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | $523.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $886.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $413.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $440.5M | — |
| Q3 25 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.4B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $6.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $877.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $837.0M | — |
| Q3 25 | $4.6B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.5B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.3B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $9.3B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.1B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.0B | — |
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 | $153.9M | $591.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $144.9M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 14.7% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.9% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 22.73× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | $153.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $103.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $98.5M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $591.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $68.6M | — |
| Q3 25 | $144.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $98.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $96.8M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $66.8M | — |
| Q3 25 | 14.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 30.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 30.1% | — |
| Q3 25 | 0.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.8% | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 8.60× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 22.73× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 12.55× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CYBR
| Subscription | $794.5M | 80% |
| Maintenance, Professional Services and other | $194.0M | 20% |
GRAB
Segment breakdown not available.
