vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of GDS Holdings Ltd (GDS) and PicoCELA Inc. (PCLA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
GDS Holdings Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($405.6M vs $252.6M, roughly 1.6× PicoCELA Inc.). GDS Holdings Ltd runs the higher net margin — -0.1% vs -125.2%, a 125.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. GDS Holdings Ltd produced more free cash flow last quarter ($-96.3M vs $-256.6M).
Amadeus IT Group, S.A. is a major Spanish multinational technology company that provides software for the global travel and tourism industry. It is the world's leading provider of travel technology that focus on developing software for airlines, hotels, travel agencies, and other travel-related businesses.
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.
GDS vs PCLA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $405.6M | $252.6M |
| Net Profit | $-373.0K | $-316.2M |
| Gross Margin | 22.1% | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -114.8% |
| Net Margin | -0.1% | -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.
| Q3 25 | $405.6M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $404.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $375.3M | $252.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $422.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $388.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $363.9M | — |
| Q3 25 | $-373.0K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-240.0K | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-145.0K | $-316.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-32.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-31.9M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-47.8M | — |
| Q3 25 | 22.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 23.7% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 21.8% | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -114.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 10.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 11.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 8.3% | — |
| Q3 25 | -0.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.0% | -125.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -7.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -8.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -13.1% | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $456.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.6B | $354.8M |
| Total Assets | $11.0B | $1.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $456.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | $3.6B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.2B | $354.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.7B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.6B | — |
| Q3 25 | $11.0B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $11.1B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.1B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.7B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $10.9B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.5B | — |
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 | $103.5M | $-245.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-96.3M | $-256.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -23.7% | -101.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 49.2% | 4.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | $103.5M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $120.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-245.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $91.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | $-96.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-55.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-256.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-321.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | -23.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -13.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -101.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | -76.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | 49.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 43.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 97.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GDS
| Service revenue | $405.5M | 100% |
| Equipment sales | $2.8M | 1% |
PCLA
| Revenue from product | $179.1M | 71% |
| Revenue from SaaS, Maintenance and others | $42.4M | 17% |
| Revenue from product – related party | $31.0M | 12% |
