vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. (FIGR) and UNIVERSAL DISPLAY CORP \PA\ (OLED). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($156.4M vs $142.2M, roughly 1.1× UNIVERSAL DISPLAY CORP \PA\). Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 57.3% vs 25.2%, a 32.0% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. is a financial technology company in Reno, Nevada, United States. Established in 2018, it develops and operates blockchain-based platforms used in lending, capital markets, and asset management.
Universal Display Corporation is a developer and manufacturer of organic light emitting diode (OLED) technologies and materials, and it is a provider of services to the display and lighting industries.
FIGR vs OLED — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $156.4M | $142.2M |
| Net Profit | $89.6M | $35.9M |
| Gross Margin | — | 74.6% |
| Operating Margin | 33.7% | 30.1% |
| Net Margin | 57.3% | 25.2% |
| Revenue YoY | — | -14.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -44.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.34 | $0.76 |
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 | — | $142.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $172.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $156.4M | $139.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $171.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $166.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $162.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $161.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $158.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | $35.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $66.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $89.6M | $44.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $67.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $64.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $46.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $66.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $52.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | 74.6% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 76.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 74.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 77.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 77.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 77.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 77.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 75.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 30.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 38.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 33.7% | 30.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 39.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 41.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 32.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 41.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 35.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | 25.2% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 38.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 57.3% | 31.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 39.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 38.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 28.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 41.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 33.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.76 | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.40 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.34 | $0.92 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.41 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.35 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.96 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.40 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.10 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.1B | $516.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $466.8M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.2B | — |
| Total Assets | $2.2B | $1.9B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.40× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $516.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $602.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $603.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $525.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $571.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $492.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $551.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $530.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $466.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.5B |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $2.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | $1.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.8B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.40× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
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 | $49.3M | $108.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.55× | 3.03× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $108.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $31.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $49.3M | $97.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $51.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $30.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $34.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $79.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $67.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $15.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $84.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $37.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $17.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $22.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $66.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $57.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 8.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 60.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 21.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 10.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 13.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 41.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 36.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 9.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 9.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 8.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 7.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 8.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 5.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | 3.03× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.47× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.55× | 2.21× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.77× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.47× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.75× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.19× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.28× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FIGR
Segment breakdown not available.
OLED
| Material sales | $83.7M | 59% |
| Royalty and license fees | $54.2M | 38% |
| Contract research services | $4.3M | 3% |
