vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Freight Technologies, Inc. (FRGT) and Globavend Holdings Ltd (GVH). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Globavend Holdings Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($13.7M vs $3.0M, roughly 4.6× Freight Technologies, Inc.). Freight Technologies, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 21.7% vs 3.3%, a 18.4% gap on every dollar of revenue.
A freight forwarder or forwarding agent is a person or a company who co-ordinates and organizes the movement of shipments on behalf of a shipper by liaising with carriers. The carriers may use a variety of shipping modes, including ships, airplanes, trucks, and railroads, and often use multiple modes for a single shipment. A freight forwarder does not move the goods but acts as an agent in the logistics network and will carry out freight consolidation, rate negotiations, shipment tracking, cu...
Globavend Holdings Ltd is a provider of smart unattended retail solutions, focusing on the design, supply, and operation of intelligent vending machines. It primarily serves markets across Australia, New Zealand, and Southeast Asia, offering end-to-end services including hardware manufacturing, inventory management software, and after-sales support to clients in retail, FMCG, and workplace service segments.
FRGT vs GVH — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 2025 vs Q1 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $3.0M | $13.7M |
| Net Profit | $649.2K | $450.3K |
| Gross Margin | — | 10.5% |
| Operating Margin | -49.2% | 5.8% |
| Net Margin | 21.7% | 3.3% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 63.7% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -49.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.02 | $6.01 |
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.
| Q2 25 | $3.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.1M | $13.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $8.4M |
| Q2 25 | $649.2K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.6M | $450.3K | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $898.8K |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 10.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 19.8% |
| Q2 25 | -49.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -35.7% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 13.8% |
| Q2 25 | 21.7% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -39.1% | 3.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 10.7% |
| Q2 25 | $0.02 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.73 | $6.01 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $12.57 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $586.7K | $915.2K |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $8.8M | $5.7M |
| Total Assets | $17.1M | $6.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $586.7K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $416.5K | $915.2K | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $2.5M |
| Q2 25 | $8.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.2M | $5.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $4.4M |
| Q2 25 | $17.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.4M | $6.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $6.0M |
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 | $-1.9M | $-906.3K |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-1.2M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -8.8% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 2.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -2.99× | -2.01× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $-1.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-3.1M | $-906.3K | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-256.6K |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-1.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-730.0K |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -8.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -8.7% |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 2.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 5.6% |
| Q2 25 | -2.99× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -2.01× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -0.29× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
