vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of GCT Semiconductor Holding, Inc. (GCTS) and Serve Robotics Inc. (SERV). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Serve Robotics Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($881.5K vs $758.0K, roughly 1.2× GCT Semiconductor Holding, Inc.). GCT Semiconductor Holding, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -1189.6% vs -3888.1%, a 2698.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Serve Robotics Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (400.1% vs -57.5%). GCT Semiconductor Holding, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-8.5M vs $-46.1M). Over the past eight quarters, Serve Robotics Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (-3.5% CAGR vs -58.8%).
GCT Semiconductor Holding, Inc. designs, develops and supplies high-performance wireless semiconductor solutions. Its product portfolio includes 4G LTE, 5G and IoT connectivity chips tailored for consumer electronics, industrial devices and telecom equipment. The company serves customers across North America, Asia-Pacific and European markets, with core segments covering mobile communications and edge connected devices.
Ecovacs Robotics is a Chinese technology company. It is best known for developing in-home robotic appliances. The company was founded in 1998 by Qian Dongqi and is headquartered in Suzhou, China. According to Global Asia, Ecovacs Robotics had more than 60% of the Chinese market for robots by 2013. In 2023, Nikkei Asia had reported that the market capitalisation of Ecovacs Robotics has grown to near $6.38 billion, which is "roughly 5 times" that of the market capitalisation of rivalling US bas...
GCTS vs SERV — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $758.0K | $881.5K |
| Net Profit | $-9.0M | $-34.3M |
| Gross Margin | -162.7% | -757.3% |
| Operating Margin | -1577.0% | -4572.1% |
| Net Margin | -1189.6% | -3888.1% |
| Revenue YoY | -57.5% | 400.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | -81.4% | -161.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.16 | $-0.50 |
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.
| Q4 25 | $758.0K | $881.5K | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $687.0K | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2M | $642.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $440.5K | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.8M | $176.3K | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.6M | $222.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5M | $468.0K | ||
| Q1 24 | $3.3M | $946.7K |
| Q4 25 | $-9.0M | $-34.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-33.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-13.5M | $-20.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-13.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-5.0M | $-13.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-7.1M | $-8.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-1.0M | $-9.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $757.0K | $-9.0M |
| Q4 25 | -162.7% | -757.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -637.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 32.0% | -445.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -333.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 32.3% | -371.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 62.3% | -70.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 62.7% | 30.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 59.8% | 62.8% |
| Q4 25 | -1577.0% | -4572.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -5067.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -642.3% | -3527.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -3406.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | -412.7% | -7701.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -226.5% | -3804.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | -482.2% | -1828.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -814.6% |
| Q4 25 | -1189.6% | -3888.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -4806.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -1145.3% | -3247.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -3000.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -278.5% | -7441.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -272.8% | -3601.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -71.0% | -1931.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 23.2% | -954.7% |
| Q4 25 | $-0.16 | $-0.50 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.54 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.26 | $-0.36 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.23 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.15 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.16 | $-0.20 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.02 | $-0.27 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.03 | $-0.37 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $590.0K | $106.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $62.6M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-83.3M | $350.7M |
| Total Assets | $15.6M | $367.8M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $590.0K | $106.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $116.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3M | $116.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $197.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4M | $123.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8M | $50.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.0M | $28.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $16.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $62.6M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $51.7M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $42.6M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $41.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $43.6M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $50.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-83.3M | $350.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $283.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-70.0M | $207.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $210.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-59.3M | $131.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-58.3M | $56.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-58.3M | $28.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-62.4M | $-8.8M |
| Q4 25 | $15.6M | $367.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $299.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $17.6M | $214.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $216.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.9M | $139.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $22.6M | $61.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $23.4M | $32.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $35.8M | $4.2M |
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 | $-7.2M | $-29.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-8.5M | $-46.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -1120.2% | -5234.4% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 167.3% | 1872.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-117.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $-7.2M | $-29.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-25.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-8.6M | $-16.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-9.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-2.3M | $-6.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-4.6M | $-5.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-9.6M | $-5.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-14.4M | $-4.1M |
| Q4 25 | $-8.5M | $-46.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-36.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-8.7M | $-22.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-12.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-11.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-4.7M | $-10.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-6.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-4.1M |
| Q4 25 | -1120.2% | -5234.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -5314.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -738.5% | -3426.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -2934.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -6307.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -179.3% | -4529.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -1396.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -431.1% |
| Q4 25 | 167.3% | 1872.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1649.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.7% | 940.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 785.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2755.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.1% | 2070.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 169.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -19.04× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
