vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Globavend Holdings Ltd (GVH) and NaaS Technology Inc. (NAAS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
NaaS Technology Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($25.9M vs $13.7M, roughly 1.9× Globavend Holdings Ltd). Globavend Holdings Ltd runs the higher net margin — 3.3% vs -193.3%, a 196.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, NaaS Technology Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (121.2% vs 63.7%).
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.
NaaS Technology Inc. is a leading electric vehicle energy service provider based in China. It delivers one-stop solutions covering charging network operation, software and hardware support for charging station operators, and value-added services such as charging location search and payment for EV owners, serving both enterprise and individual customers across domestic and select overseas markets.
GVH vs NAAS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $13.7M | $25.9M |
| Net Profit | $450.3K | $-50.0M |
| Gross Margin | 10.5% | 29.2% |
| Operating Margin | 5.8% | -144.2% |
| Net Margin | 3.3% | -193.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 63.7% | 121.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | -49.9% | 18.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $6.01 | $-0.02 |
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 25 | $13.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $25.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.4M | — |
| Q1 25 | $450.3K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-50.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $898.8K | — |
| Q1 25 | 10.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 29.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 19.8% | — |
| Q1 25 | 5.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -144.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 13.8% | — |
| Q1 25 | 3.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -193.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 10.7% | — |
| Q1 25 | $6.01 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.02 | ||
| 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 | $24.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $5.7M | $-33.4M |
| Total Assets | $6.4M | $180.2M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 25 | $915.2K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $24.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.5M | — |
| Q1 25 | $5.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-33.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.4M | — |
| Q1 25 | $6.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $180.2M | ||
| 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 | $-25.7M |
| 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.
| Q1 25 | $-906.3K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-25.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-256.6K | — |
| Q1 25 | $-1.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $-730.0K | — |
| Q1 25 | -8.8% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -8.7% | — |
| Q1 25 | 2.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 5.6% | — |
| Q1 25 | -2.01× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | -0.29× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
