vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Aurora Mobile Ltd (JG) 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 $25.0M, roughly 1.0× Aurora Mobile Ltd). Aurora Mobile Ltd runs the higher net margin — -1.4% vs -193.3%, a 191.8% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Aurora Innovation, Inc., doing business as Aurora, is a self-driving vehicle technology company based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Aurora has developed the Aurora Driver, a computer system that can be integrated into cars for autonomous driving. It was co-founded by Chris Urmson, the former chief technology officer of Google/Alphabet Inc.'s self-driving team, which became known as Waymo, as well as by Sterling Anderson, former head of Tesla Autopilot, and Drew Bagnell, former head of Uber's a...
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.
JG vs NAAS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2024
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $25.0M | $25.9M |
| Net Profit | $-360.0K | $-50.0M |
| Gross Margin | 66.3% | 29.2% |
| Operating Margin | -1.4% | -144.2% |
| Net Margin | -1.4% | -193.3% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 121.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 18.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-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.
| Q2 25 | $25.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $43.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $25.9M |
| Q2 25 | $-360.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-965.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-50.0M |
| Q2 25 | 66.3% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 66.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 29.2% |
| Q2 25 | -1.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -144.2% |
| Q2 25 | -1.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -2.2% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -193.3% |
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.02 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $16.7M | $24.7M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $9.0M | $-33.4M |
| Total Assets | $53.2M | $180.2M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $16.7M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $24.7M |
| Q2 25 | $9.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $9.3M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-33.4M |
| Q2 25 | $53.2M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $51.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $180.2M |
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 | $795.0K | $-25.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $772.0K | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 3.1% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.1% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q2 25 | $795.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-25.7M |
| Q2 25 | $772.0K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $553.0K | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | 3.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q2 25 | 0.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 1.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
