vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of H2O AMERICA (HTO) and Pagaya Technologies Ltd. (PGY). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Pagaya Technologies Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($321.0M vs $199.4M, roughly 1.6× H2O AMERICA). Pagaya Technologies Ltd. runs the higher net margin — 10.7% vs 8.1%, a 2.5% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Pagaya Technologies Ltd. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (16.5% vs 1.5%). Over the past eight quarters, Pagaya Technologies Ltd.'s revenue compounded faster (16.4% CAGR vs 15.3%).
H2O Wireless is a United States-based prepaid cell phone service, that utilizes the AT&T network. It is a brand of the mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) Locus Telecommunications, a subsidiary of Telrite Holdings, Inc., since 2019. Locus was formerly a subsidiary of KDDI America corporation, starting in 2010. H2O Wireless is primarily advertised as a non-restrictive phone service for customers to bring or buy unlocked smartphones, although AT&T contract/locked phones may be accepted as well.
Pagaya Technologies is an Israeli-American financial technology company based in New York City. The company evaluates loan applications using artificial intelligence (AI) with the aim of modernizing credit checks. The company has been listed on the New York Stock Exchange since 2022. According to its own figures, Pagaya had assessed loan applications with a volume of around US$2.6 trillion and brokered a cumulative loan volume of around US$28 billion by 2024. Its customers are mainly banks an...
HTO vs PGY — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $199.4M | $321.0M |
| Net Profit | $16.2M | $34.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | 40.8% |
| Operating Margin | 16.6% | 24.8% |
| Net Margin | 8.1% | 10.7% |
| Revenue YoY | 1.5% | 16.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | -29.2% | 114.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.45 | $0.40 |
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 | $199.4M | $321.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $243.5M | $339.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $197.8M | $317.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $164.9M | $282.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $196.5M | $275.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $216.7M | $249.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $173.1M | $242.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $150.0M | $237.0M |
| Q4 25 | $16.2M | $34.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $45.1M | $22.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $24.7M | $16.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $16.6M | $7.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $22.9M | $-237.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $38.7M | $-67.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $20.7M | $-74.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $11.7M | $-21.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 40.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 41.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 39.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 40.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 42.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 40.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 40.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 38.9% |
| Q4 25 | 16.6% | 24.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.5% | 23.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 22.2% | 17.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.8% | 16.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 22.2% | 11.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.9% | 9.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.4% | 2.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 18.6% | 3.2% |
| Q4 25 | 8.1% | 10.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.5% | 6.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 12.5% | 5.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 10.0% | 2.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 11.7% | -86.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 17.8% | -27.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.0% | -30.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.8% | -9.0% |
| Q4 25 | $0.45 | $0.40 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.27 | $0.23 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.71 | $0.20 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.49 | $0.10 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.70 | $-3.36 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.17 | $-0.93 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.64 | $-1.04 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.36 | $-0.33 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $20.7M | $235.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.9B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.5B | $480.0M |
| Total Assets | $5.1B | $1.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 1.23× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $20.7M | $235.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $11.3M | $218.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $19.8M | $183.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $23.7M | $186.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $11.1M | $187.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.0M | $147.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $22.8M | $233.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.5M | $274.5M |
| Q4 25 | $1.9B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $317.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.7B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $230.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $232.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $235.0M |
| Q4 25 | $1.5B | $480.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.5B | $438.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.5B | $366.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $335.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.4B | $326.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.3B | $462.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $526.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.2B | $626.8M |
| Q4 25 | $5.1B | $1.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $4.8B | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.7B | $1.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | $4.7B | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.6B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.4B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.4B | $1.5B |
| Q4 25 | 1.23× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.95× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.26× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.50× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.44× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.37× |
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 | $63.5M | $79.8M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $76.7M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 23.9% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 1.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 3.92× | 2.33× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $224.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $63.5M | $79.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $77.3M | $67.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $60.8M | $57.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $43.2M | $34.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $41.5M | $27.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $53.5M | $-7.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $49.3M | $9.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $51.2M | $17.7M |
| Q4 25 | — | $76.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $63.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $53.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $30.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $23.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-11.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $4.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $12.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | 23.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 18.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 16.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 10.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 8.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -4.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 2.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 5.3% |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 2.2% |
| Q4 25 | 3.92× | 2.33× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.71× | 2.97× | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.47× | 3.44× | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.61× | 4.36× | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.81× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.39× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.38× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.38× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
HTO
| Water Utility Services | $191.0M | 96% |
| Other | $8.4M | 4% |
PGY
| Network AI Fees | $287.4M | 90% |
| Financial Service | $33.6M | 10% |
