vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Enova International, Inc. (ENVA) and Monolithic Power Systems (MPWR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Enova International, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($875.1M vs $804.2M, roughly 1.1× Monolithic Power Systems). Monolithic Power Systems runs the higher net margin — 24.0% vs 10.4%, a 13.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Monolithic Power Systems posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (26.1% vs 17.4%). Over the past eight quarters, Monolithic Power Systems's revenue compounded faster (25.9% CAGR vs 18.0%).
Enova International, Inc. is a global fintech firm providing online financial solutions including short-term consumer loans and small business financing. It operates mainly across North America, South America and Europe, using advanced data analytics to assess creditworthiness and deliver tailored products to underserved borrower segments.
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. is an American, publicly traded company headquartered in Kirkland, Washington. It operates in more than 15 locations worldwide.
ENVA vs MPWR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $875.1M | $804.2M |
| Net Profit | $91.1M | $193.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | 55.3% |
| Operating Margin | 23.7% | 30.0% |
| Net Margin | 10.4% | 24.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 17.4% | 26.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 24.9% | 43.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $3.46 | $3.92 |
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.
| Q1 26 | $875.1M | $804.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $839.4M | $751.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $802.7M | $737.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $764.0M | $664.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $745.5M | $637.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $729.6M | $621.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $689.9M | $620.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $628.4M | $507.4M |
| Q1 26 | $91.1M | $193.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $79.0M | $171.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $80.3M | $179.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $76.1M | $135.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $72.9M | $135.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $63.7M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $43.4M | $144.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $53.9M | $100.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | 55.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | 59.8% | 55.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 57.4% | 55.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 57.8% | 55.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 57.2% | 55.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 56.6% | 55.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 58.0% | 55.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 58.9% | 55.3% |
| Q1 26 | 23.7% | 30.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 22.2% | 26.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.5% | 26.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.1% | 24.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 23.1% | 26.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.3% | 26.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.3% | 26.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.1% | 23.0% |
| Q1 26 | 10.4% | 24.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 9.4% | 22.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 10.0% | 24.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.0% | 20.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.8% | 21.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 8.7% | 201.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.3% | 23.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.6% | 19.8% |
| Q1 26 | $3.46 | $3.92 | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.94 | $3.50 | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.03 | $3.74 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.86 | $2.81 | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.69 | $2.81 | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.29 | $25.71 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.57 | $2.95 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.93 | $2.05 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $96.1M | $1.4B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $4.8B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $3.7B |
| Total Assets | $6.9B | $4.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $96.1M | $1.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $71.7M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $53.6M | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $55.6M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $55.5M | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $73.9M | $862.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $67.5M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $60.1M | $1.3B |
| Q1 26 | $4.8B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.0B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.8B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.6B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.3B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.2B | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $3.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.2B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $2.2B |
| Q1 26 | $6.9B | $4.4B | ||
| Q4 25 | $6.5B | $4.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.0B | $4.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.7B | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.5B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.3B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.0B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.8B | $2.6B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 3.37× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.20× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.23× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.14× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.98× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.79× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.78× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
