vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Metalpha Technology Holding Ltd (MATH) and Mega Matrix Inc (MPU). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Metalpha Technology Holding Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($12.0M vs $6.1M, roughly 2.0× Mega Matrix Inc). Metalpha Technology Holding Ltd runs the higher net margin — -24.0% vs -177.4%, a 153.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Metalpha Technology Holding Ltd posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (-39.0% vs -40.9%).
Metalpha Technology Holding LtdMATHEarnings & Financial Report
Metalpha Technology Holding Ltd is a global fintech firm specializing in digital asset wealth management, institutional-grade crypto investment services, and Web3 ecosystem infrastructure support. It serves professional investors, financial institutions, and high-net-worth clients across Asia, North America and Europe, with core segments including structured digital asset products, risk management solutions and DeFi technology development.
MATH vs MPU — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 FY2025 vs Q3 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $12.0M | $6.1M |
| Net Profit | $-2.9M | $-10.8M |
| Gross Margin | 28.3% | 47.7% |
| Operating Margin | -24.2% | -156.3% |
| Net Margin | -24.0% | -177.4% |
| Revenue YoY | -39.0% | -40.9% |
| Net Profit YoY | -147.7% | -291.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.07 | $-0.21 |
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 | $12.0M | $6.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $7.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $24.8M | $7.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $19.7M | $10.3M |
| Q3 25 | $-2.9M | $-10.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-1.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $9.8M | $-2.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.0M | $-2.8M |
| Q3 25 | 28.3% | 47.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 58.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 85.7% | 55.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 49.5% | 58.5% |
| Q3 25 | -24.2% | -156.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -21.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 39.3% | -32.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 38.9% | -26.0% |
| Q3 25 | -24.0% | -177.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -20.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 39.6% | -32.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 30.7% | -26.8% |
| Q3 25 | $-0.07 | $-0.21 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.25 | $-0.07 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.16 | $-0.08 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $10.1M | $9.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $101.2K | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $35.1M | $37.4M |
| Total Assets | $413.8M | $42.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.00× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | $10.1M | $9.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $4.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.9M | $6.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $3.8M | $9.9M |
| Q3 25 | $101.2K | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $188.0K | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $275.1K | — |
| Q3 25 | $35.1M | $37.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $10.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $36.6M | $11.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $25.3M | $15.8M |
| Q3 25 | $413.8M | $42.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $16.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $246.8M | $17.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $237.2M | $22.4M |
| Q3 25 | 0.00× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.01× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.01× | — |
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 | $3.3M | $-3.5M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q3 25 | $3.3M | $-3.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-1.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $16.2M | $-2.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-16.1M | — |
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.64× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | -2.66× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
