vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of BingEx Ltd (FLX) and OLAPLEX HOLDINGS, INC. (OLPX). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
BingEx Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($143.2M vs $105.1M, roughly 1.4× OLAPLEX HOLDINGS, INC.). BingEx Ltd runs the higher net margin — 2.2% vs -12.5%, a 14.7% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Olaplex Holdings, Inc. is a specialty beauty company developing and selling patented bond-repair hair care products. It runs three core segments: professional salon distribution, direct-to-consumer sales, and third-party retail, serving customers across North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific with products that repair and protect damaged hair.
FLX vs OLPX — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $143.2M | $105.1M |
| Net Profit | $3.2M | $-13.1M |
| Gross Margin | 10.8% | 68.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | -4.3% |
| Net Margin | 2.2% | -12.5% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 4.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -48.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-0.02 |
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 | — | $105.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $141.2M | $114.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $143.0M | $106.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $141.0M | $97.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $100.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $164.6M | $119.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $103.9M |
| Q1 26 | $3.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-13.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.1M | $11.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.5M | $-7.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $27.6M | $465.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-8.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4M | $14.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $5.8M |
| Q1 26 | 10.8% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 68.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.1% | 69.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.0% | 71.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.0% | 69.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 66.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.3% | 68.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 69.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -4.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.4% | 3.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.9% | -1.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 8.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.0% | 23.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 15.7% |
| Q1 26 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -12.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.4% | 9.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.2% | -7.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.6% | 0.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -8.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.1% | 12.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 5.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.02 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.02 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.01 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.00 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.01 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.02 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.01 |
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 | $318.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $352.3M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $879.4M |
| Total Assets | $1.3B | $1.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.40× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $561.1M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $318.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $628.6M | $286.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $499.4M | $289.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $592.4M | $580.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $586.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $517.4M | $538.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $507.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $352.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $352.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $351.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $649.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $650.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $651.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $653.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $879.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $888.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $874.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $878.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $874.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $879.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $863.3M |
| Q1 26 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $1.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | $926.8M | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.8B |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.40× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.74× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.74× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.74× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.76× |
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 | — | $32.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $32.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 31.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $58.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $32.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $8.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $20.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-2.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $49.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $33.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $16.2M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $32.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $7.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $20.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-3.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $49.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $33.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $16.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 31.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 6.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 19.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -3.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 48.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 28.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 15.5% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.72× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -6.27× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.26× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.81× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FLX
Segment breakdown not available.
OLPX
| Sales Channel Directly To Consumer | $43.6M | 42% |
| Sales Channel Through Intermediary Professional | $36.8M | 35% |
| Sales Channel Through Intermediary Specialty Retail | $24.7M | 23% |
