vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of International General Insurance Holdings Ltd. (IGIC) and PicoCELA Inc. (PCLA). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
International General Insurance Holdings Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($403.8M vs $252.6M, roughly 1.6× PicoCELA Inc.). International General Insurance Holdings Ltd. runs the higher net margin — 26.0% vs -125.2%, a 151.2% gap on every dollar of revenue.
China Taiping Insurance Holdings Company Limited (CTIH) formerly China Insurance International Holdings Company Limited (CIIH), is a Chinese insurance conglomerate. The company has strong Chinese Central Government background despite being incorporated in Hong Kong. It is considered as a red chip company.
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.
IGIC vs PCLA — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $403.8M | $252.6M |
| Net Profit | $105.1M | $-316.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -114.8% |
| Net Margin | 26.0% | -125.2% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $2.31 | — |
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 | $403.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $261.9M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $252.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $369.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $265.8M | — | ||
| Q3 23 | $293.0M | — |
| Q3 25 | $105.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $61.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-316.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-134.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $70.7M | — | ||
| Q3 23 | $-103.7M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -114.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | -73.3% | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | 26.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -125.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | -36.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 26.6% | — | ||
| Q3 23 | -35.4% | — |
| Q3 25 | $2.31 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.36 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.82 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.55 | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $244.7M | $456.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $654.8M | $354.8M |
| Total Assets | $2.0B | $1.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | $244.7M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $164.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $456.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $219.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $237.3M | — | ||
| Q3 23 | $122.2M | — |
| Q3 25 | $654.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $662.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $354.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $540.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $588.2M | — | ||
| Q3 23 | $411.0M | — |
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.1B | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.8B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.0B | — | ||
| Q3 23 | $1.6B | — |
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 | — | $-245.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-256.6M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -101.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 4.3% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $27.2M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-245.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $120.7M | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $26.8M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-256.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $119.8M | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 10.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -101.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 45.1% | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.44× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.71× | — | ||
| Q3 23 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
IGIC
Segment breakdown not available.
PCLA
| Revenue from product | $179.1M | 71% |
| Revenue from SaaS, Maintenance and others | $42.4M | 17% |
| Revenue from product – related party | $31.0M | 12% |
