vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of BingEx Ltd (FLX) and PicoCELA Inc. (PCLA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
PicoCELA Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($252.6M vs $143.2M, roughly 1.8× BingEx Ltd). BingEx Ltd runs the higher net margin — 2.2% vs -125.2%, a 127.4% gap on every dollar of revenue.
PicoCELA Inc. is a global technology company specializing in low-power, high-reliability wireless connectivity solutions, including Wi-Fi HaLow modules and edge network infrastructure. It caters to industrial IoT, smart city, retail, and smart home segments, with a primary operational footprint across Asia, North America, and European markets.
FLX vs PCLA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $143.2M | $252.6M |
| Net Profit | $3.2M | $-316.2M |
| Gross Margin | 10.8% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -114.8% |
| Net Margin | 2.2% | -125.2% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | — |
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 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $141.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $143.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $141.0M | $252.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $164.6M | — |
| Q1 26 | $3.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $6.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $27.6M | $-316.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.4M | — |
| Q1 26 | 10.8% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 11.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.0% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 11.3% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -114.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 4.0% | — |
| Q1 26 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 4.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.6% | -125.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.1% | — |
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 | $456.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $354.8M |
| Total Assets | $1.3B | $1.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $561.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $628.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $499.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $592.4M | $456.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $517.4M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $354.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $926.8M | — |
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 | — | $-245.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-256.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -101.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 4.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-245.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-256.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -101.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FLX
Segment breakdown not available.
PCLA
| Revenue from product | $179.1M | 71% |
| Revenue from SaaS, Maintenance and others | $42.4M | 17% |
| Revenue from product – related party | $31.0M | 12% |
