vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Globavend Holdings Ltd (GVH) and Lucas GC Ltd (LGCL). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Globavend Holdings Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($13.7M vs $7.5M, roughly 1.8× Lucas GC Ltd). Lucas GC Ltd runs the higher net margin — 5.6% vs 3.3%, a 2.3% gap on every dollar of revenue.
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.
GVH vs LGCL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $13.7M | $7.5M |
| Net Profit | $450.3K | $414.1K |
| Gross Margin | 10.5% | 33.7% |
| Operating Margin | 5.8% | 4.0% |
| Net Margin | 3.3% | 5.6% |
| Revenue YoY | 63.7% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | -49.9% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $6.01 | $0.20 |
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 | — | $7.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $13.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $11.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.4M | — |
| Q2 25 | — | $414.1K | ||
| Q1 25 | $450.3K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $898.8K | — |
| Q2 25 | — | 33.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 33.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 19.8% | — |
| Q2 25 | — | 4.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 5.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 8.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.8% | — |
| Q2 25 | — | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 8.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.7% | — |
| Q2 25 | — | $0.20 | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.01 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.01 | ||
| 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 | $915.2K | $606.9K |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $5.7M | $6.3M |
| Total Assets | $6.4M | $8.8M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | — | $606.9K | ||
| Q1 25 | $915.2K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $978.1K | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.5M | — |
| Q2 25 | — | $6.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $5.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $5.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.4M | — |
| Q2 25 | — | $8.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $7.8M | ||
| 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 | $-906.3K | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-1.2M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -8.8% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.2% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | -2.01× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-906.3K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-256.6K | — |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-730.0K | — |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -8.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -8.7% | — |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.6% | — |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.01× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.29× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
GVH
Segment breakdown not available.
LGCL
| Recruitment service | $4.4M | 60% |
| Others | $2.9M | 39% |
