vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Logistic Properties of the Americas (LPA) and SolarMax Technology, Inc. (SMXT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Logistic Properties of the Americas is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($50.1M vs $46.6M, roughly 1.1× SolarMax Technology, Inc.). Logistic Properties of the Americas runs the higher net margin — 32.1% vs -1.9%, a 34.0% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Logistic Properties of the Americas is a specialized industrial real estate firm that acquires, develops and manages logistics properties across North, Central and South America. Its portfolio includes distribution centers, warehouses and last-mile delivery facilities, serving e-commerce, retail, manufacturing and third-party logistics clients.
SolarMax Technology, Inc. develops, manufactures and sells high-efficiency solar PV modules and clean energy systems. It serves residential, commercial and industrial clients in North America and key Asia-Pacific markets, offering installation and after-sales support to boost low-carbon energy use.
LPA vs SMXT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $50.1M | $46.6M |
| Net Profit | $16.1M | $-872.2K |
| Gross Margin | — | 2.7% |
| Operating Margin | 81.7% | -2.7% |
| Net Margin | 32.1% | -1.9% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 623.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 77.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.33 | $-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.
| Q4 25 | $50.1M | $46.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $32.7M | $30.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $21.5M | $6.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $10.5M | $6.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $6.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $19.2M | $6.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $9.2M | — |
| Q4 25 | $16.1M | $-872.2K | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-2.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-1.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-1.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-3.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-9.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 2.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 8.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 20.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 14.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 19.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 81.7% | -2.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -6.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -25.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -16.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -27.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -158.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 32.1% | -1.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -7.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -27.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -18.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -60.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -152.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $0.33 | $-0.02 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.09 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.06 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.03 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.07 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-1.26 | $-0.21 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $27.3M | $8.0M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $296.8M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $324.6M | $-12.2M |
| Total Assets | $700.8M | $91.3M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.91× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $27.3M | $8.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $5.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $6.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $7.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $8.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $296.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $324.6M | $-12.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-11.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-15.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-15.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-15.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-10.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $700.8M | $91.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $58.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $38.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $38.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $38.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $43.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.91× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $21.6M | $-2.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $21.4M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 42.7% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 0.3% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 1.34× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $12.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $21.6M | $-2.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.4M | $3.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $7.2M | $220.7K | ||
| Q1 25 | $4.4M | $-601.1K | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-1.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.3M | $203.6K | ||
| Q1 24 | $4.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | $21.4M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $-7.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $-3.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $966.4K | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $-2.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $218.9K | — |
| Q4 25 | 42.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | -22.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | -14.4% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 9.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -12.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.4% | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.3% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 66.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 47.9% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 32.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 55.5% | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 50.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | 1.34× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
LPA
Segment breakdown not available.
SMXT
| Yabucoa | $35.9M | 77% |
| Other | $10.7M | 23% |
