vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of BingEx Ltd (FLX) and MARA Holdings, Inc. (MARA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
MARA Holdings, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($202.3M vs $143.2M, roughly 1.4× BingEx Ltd). BingEx Ltd runs the higher net margin — 2.2% vs -14298.3%, a 14300.5% gap on every dollar of revenue.
MARA Holdings, Inc. is an American digital asset technology and cryptocurrency mining company headquartered in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Founded in 2010, the company initially operated as a patent holding company before pivoting in the late 2010s to focus on blockchain infrastructure and digital assets.
FLX vs MARA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $143.2M | $202.3M |
| Net Profit | $3.2M | $-1.7B |
| Gross Margin | 10.8% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -11795.9% |
| Net Margin | 2.2% | -14298.3% |
| Revenue YoY | — | -5.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -423.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-4.25 |
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 | $143.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $202.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $141.2M | $252.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $143.0M | $238.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $141.0M | $213.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $214.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $164.6M | $131.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $145.1M |
| Q1 26 | $3.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-1.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.1M | $123.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.5M | $808.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $27.6M | $-533.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $528.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4M | $-124.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-199.7M |
| Q1 26 | 10.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.0% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -2613.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.3% | -1065.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -587.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -11795.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.4% | 18.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -253.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.0% | -130.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -160.1% |
| Q1 26 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -14298.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.4% | 48.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.2% | 338.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.6% | -249.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 5367.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.1% | -94.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -137.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-4.25 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.27 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.84 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-1.55 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.60 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.42 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.72 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $561.1M | $547.1M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $3.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $3.5B |
| Total Assets | $1.3B | $7.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 1.04× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $561.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $547.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $628.6M | $826.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $499.4M | $109.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $592.4M | $196.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $391.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $517.4M | $164.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $256.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $618.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $5.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $4.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.6B |
| Q1 26 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $7.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $9.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $7.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $6.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $6.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $926.8M | $3.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.1B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 1.04× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.63× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.47× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.62× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.59× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.22× | ||
| 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 | — | $-802.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-1.2B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -598.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 201.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-2.0B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-802.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-199.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-163.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-215.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-677.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-160.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-115.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-283.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-282.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-254.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-927.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-198.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-132.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -598.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -112.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -118.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -118.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -432.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -150.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -91.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 201.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 33.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 49.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 18.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 117.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 28.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 11.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -1.62× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -0.20× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -1.28× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
