vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Figure Technology Solutions, Inc. (FIGR) and Sprout Social, Inc. (SPT). 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 $120.9M, roughly 1.3× Sprout Social, Inc.).
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.
Sprout Social, Inc. is a technology company that runs a social media management platform. A public company headquartered in Chicago, it was founded in 2010 by Justyn Howard, Aaron Rankin, Gil Lara, and Peter Soung.
FIGR vs SPT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $156.4M | $120.9M |
| Net Profit | $89.6M | — |
| Gross Margin | — | 77.6% |
| Operating Margin | 33.7% | -9.0% |
| Net Margin | 57.3% | — |
| Revenue YoY | — | 12.9% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.34 | $-0.18 |
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 | — | $120.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $156.4M | $115.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $111.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $109.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $107.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $102.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $99.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $96.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $89.6M | $-9.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-12.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-11.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-17.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-16.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-13.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | 77.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 77.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 77.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 77.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 78.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 77.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 77.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 76.8% |
| Q4 25 | — | -9.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 33.7% | -7.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -11.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -10.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -12.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -16.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -16.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -13.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 57.3% | -8.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -10.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -10.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -16.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -17.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -14.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.18 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.34 | $-0.16 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.21 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.19 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.25 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.30 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.30 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-0.24 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.1B | $95.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $466.8M | $40.0M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.2B | $203.4M |
| Total Assets | $2.2B | $523.1M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.40× | 0.20× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $95.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $90.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $101.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $100.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $86.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $82.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $80.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $69.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $40.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $466.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $25.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $203.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.2B | $194.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $184.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $175.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $166.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $158.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $152.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $147.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $523.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.2B | $481.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $422.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $424.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $428.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $388.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $393.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $389.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.20× | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.40× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.15× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 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 | $10.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $9.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 8.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.55× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $39.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $10.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $49.3M | $9.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $5.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $18.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $9.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $11.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $9.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $8.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $16.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $8.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $10.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 7.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 15.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 8.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 10.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 1.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.55× | — | ||
| 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.
