vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Five Point Holdings, LLC (FPH) and Greenland Technologies Holding Corp. (GTEC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Greenland Technologies Holding Corp. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($23.9M vs $13.6M, roughly 1.8× Five Point Holdings, LLC). Greenland Technologies Holding Corp. runs the higher net margin — -6.6% vs -16.4%, a 9.8% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Greenland Technologies Holding Corp. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (23.4% vs 3.2%). Over the past eight quarters, Greenland Technologies Holding Corp.'s revenue compounded faster (2.5% CAGR vs -48.5%).
Five Point Holdings, LLC is a leading U.S. real estate development company that focuses on planning and constructing large-scale master-planned mixed-use communities in high-demand markets across California. Its projects integrate residential housing, commercial office spaces, retail outlets, public amenities and recreational facilities to build vibrant, sustainable living and working environments for local populations.
Greenland Technologies Holding Corp is a specialized developer and manufacturer of electric industrial vehicles, lithium-ion drivetrain systems and industrial clean energy solutions. Its core products include electric forklifts and electric construction equipment components, serving logistics, construction and industrial customers across North America and Asia Pacific.
FPH vs GTEC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $13.6M | $23.9M |
| Net Profit | $-2.2M | $-1.6M |
| Gross Margin | — | 35.4% |
| Operating Margin | -43.5% | -0.1% |
| Net Margin | -16.4% | -6.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 3.2% | 23.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | -109.6% | -120.8% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-0.11 |
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 | $13.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $75.9M | $23.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.5M | $23.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.5M | $21.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.2M | $21.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $159.8M | $19.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $17.0M | $18.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $51.2M | $23.0M |
| Q1 26 | $-2.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $58.7M | $-1.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $21.1M | $5.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.3M | $-3.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.3M | $4.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $121.0M | $7.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.8M | $-684.4K | ||
| Q2 24 | $14.7M | $4.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 35.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 32.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 26.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 30.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 26.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 26.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 29.4% |
| Q1 26 | -43.5% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 89.0% | -0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 21.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -10.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 22.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 87.5% | 19.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 83.6% | 15.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 86.1% | 17.3% |
| Q1 26 | -16.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 77.3% | -6.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 156.2% | 24.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 44.4% | -14.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 177.0% | 18.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 75.7% | 39.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 28.0% | -3.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 28.8% | 20.2% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.11 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.33 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.20 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $0.29 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.56 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.05 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.34 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $332.6M | $32.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.3B | $72.9M |
| Total Assets | $3.2B | $115.8M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $332.6M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $425.5M | $32.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $351.1M | $33.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $456.6M | $23.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $528.3M | $20.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $430.9M | $25.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $224.5M | $24.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $217.4M | $22.6M |
| Q1 26 | $2.3B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.3B | $72.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.3B | $75.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.2B | $69.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.2B | $64.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.2B | $60.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.0B | $57.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0B | $56.3M |
| Q1 26 | $3.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.2B | $115.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.2B | $123.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $123.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.2B | $118.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.1B | $115.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.9B | $127.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.9B | $126.8M |
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 | $-44.5M | $7.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.0% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $-44.5M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $105.2M | $7.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $40.4M | $8.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-71.6M | $-1.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $56.7M | $1.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $116.0M | $4.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-18.0M | $6.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-23.2M | $11.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $105.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $8.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-71.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $56.7M | $1.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $115.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-18.2M | $5.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-23.6M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 138.4% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 34.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | -959.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 430.9% | 5.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 72.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -106.9% | 30.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -46.1% | — |
| Q1 26 | 0.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.0% | 1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.3% | 0.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.3% | 1.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.7% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.79× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.92× | 1.44× | ||
| Q2 25 | -21.58× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.44× | 0.31× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.96× | 0.57× | ||
| Q3 24 | -3.77× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -1.58× | 2.44× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
FPH
Segment breakdown not available.
GTEC
| Transmission Boxes For Forklift | $23.1M | 97% |
| Other | $758.3K | 3% |
