vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Greenland Technologies Holding Corp. (GTEC) and Nine Energy Service, Inc. (NINE). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Nine Energy Service, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($41.6M vs $23.9M, roughly 1.7× Greenland Technologies Holding Corp.). Nine Energy Service, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 259.3% vs -6.6%, a 265.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Greenland Technologies Holding Corp. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (23.4% vs -68.5%). Over the past eight quarters, Greenland Technologies Holding Corp.'s revenue compounded faster (2.5% CAGR vs -43.9%).
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.
Xcel Energy Inc. is a U.S. regulated electric utility and natural gas delivery company based in Minneapolis, Minnesota, serving approximately 3.9 million electricity customers and 2.2 million natural gas customers across parts of eight states as of mid-2025. It consists of four operating subsidiaries: Northern States Power-Minnesota, Northern States Power-Wisconsin, Public Service Company of Colorado, and Southwestern Public Service Co.
GTEC vs NINE — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $23.9M | $41.6M |
| Net Profit | $-1.6M | $107.9M |
| Gross Margin | 35.4% | 9.1% |
| Operating Margin | -0.1% | — |
| Net Margin | -6.6% | 259.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 23.4% | -68.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | -120.8% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.11 | $2.65 |
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 | — | $41.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $23.9M | $132.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $23.4M | $132.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $21.7M | $147.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $21.7M | $150.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $19.4M | $141.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $18.8M | $138.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $23.0M | $132.4M |
| Q1 26 | — | $107.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-1.6M | $-19.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.7M | $-14.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.2M | $-10.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.0M | $-7.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.6M | $-8.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-684.4K | $-10.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.7M | $-14.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | 9.1% | ||
| 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 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -0.1% | -4.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 21.6% | -0.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | -10.7% | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 22.2% | 3.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 19.4% | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 15.5% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 17.3% | -1.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | 259.3% | ||
| Q4 25 | -6.6% | -14.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.5% | -11.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -14.8% | -7.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.5% | -4.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 39.2% | -6.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | -3.6% | -7.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 20.2% | -10.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | $2.65 | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.11 | $-0.47 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.33 | $-0.35 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.20 | $-0.25 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.29 | $-0.18 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.56 | $-0.21 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.05 | $-0.26 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.34 | $-0.40 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $32.2M | $11.2M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $94.4M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $72.9M | — |
| Total Assets | $115.8M | $326.0M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $11.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $32.2M | $18.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $33.0M | $14.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $23.1M | $14.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $20.2M | $17.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $25.2M | $27.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $24.7M | $15.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $22.6M | $26.0M |
| Q1 26 | — | $94.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $72.9M | $-115.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $75.4M | $-95.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $69.2M | $-81.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $64.6M | $-72.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $60.2M | $-66.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $57.1M | $-57.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $56.3M | $-49.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | $326.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $115.8M | $339.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $123.4M | $340.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $123.6M | $361.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $118.6M | $359.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $115.6M | $360.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $127.5M | $353.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $126.8M | $381.7M |
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 | $7.8M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $7.8M | $-2.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.3M | $-9.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.7M | $10.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2M | $-5.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.4M | $15.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.1M | $-5.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.3M | $12.9M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-4.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.0M | $-13.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2M | $-9.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $11.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.8M | $-9.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $10.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -3.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 34.2% | -10.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.7% | -6.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 8.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 30.9% | -6.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 7.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 2.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.1% | 2.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 4.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.1% | 2.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.2% | 2.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.0% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.44× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.31× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.57× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.44× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GTEC
| Transmission Boxes For Forklift | $23.1M | 97% |
| Other | $758.3K | 3% |
NINE
Segment breakdown not available.
