vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Monolithic Power Systems (MPWR) and TIC Solutions, Inc. (TIC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Monolithic Power Systems is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($751.2M vs $508.3M, roughly 1.5× TIC Solutions, Inc.). Monolithic Power Systems runs the higher net margin — 22.9% vs -9.3%, a 32.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. Monolithic Power Systems produced more free cash flow last quarter ($63.9M vs $37.1M).
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. is an American, publicly traded company headquartered in Kirkland, Washington. It operates in more than 15 locations worldwide.
MPWR vs TIC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $751.2M | $508.3M |
| Net Profit | $171.7M | $-47.2M |
| Gross Margin | 55.2% | 35.2% |
| Operating Margin | 26.6% | -3.8% |
| Net Margin | 22.9% | -9.3% |
| Revenue YoY | 20.8% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | -86.3% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $3.50 | — |
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 | $751.2M | $508.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $737.2M | $473.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $664.6M | $313.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $637.6M | $234.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $621.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $620.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $507.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $457.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $171.7M | $-47.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $179.8M | $-13.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $135.0M | $-233.0K | ||
| Q1 25 | $135.1M | $-25.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $144.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $100.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $92.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | 55.2% | 35.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 55.1% | 32.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 55.1% | 23.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 55.4% | 18.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 55.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 55.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 55.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 55.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | 26.6% | -3.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.5% | -1.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.8% | 5.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 26.5% | -4.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 26.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.0% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 20.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | 22.9% | -9.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.4% | -2.9% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.3% | -0.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.2% | -11.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | 201.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.8% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 20.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | $3.50 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.74 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.81 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.81 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $25.71 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.95 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.05 | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.89 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.3B | $439.5M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $1.6B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.5B | $2.2B |
| Total Assets | $4.2B | $4.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.74× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $439.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $164.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $130.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $155.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $862.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.3B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $751.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $752.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | $2.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4B | $2.0B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | — |
| Q4 25 | $4.2B | $4.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.1B | $4.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.9B | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7B | $2.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.5B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.9B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.6B | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.6B | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.74× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.83× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.64× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.67× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 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 | $104.9M | $49.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $63.9M | $37.1M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 8.5% | 7.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.5% | 2.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.61× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $666.2M | $61.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $104.9M | $49.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $239.3M | $19.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $237.6M | $-6.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $256.4M | $32.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $167.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $231.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $141.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $248.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $63.9M | $37.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $196.8M | $10.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $189.5M | $-14.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $216.0M | $28.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $102.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $197.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $109.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $232.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | 8.5% | 7.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.7% | 2.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 28.5% | -4.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 33.9% | 12.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 31.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 50.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | 5.5% | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.8% | 1.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.2% | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.3% | 1.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.2% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 3.5% | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.61× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.33× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.76× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.90× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.13× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.60× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.40× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 2.68× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
MPWR
Segment breakdown not available.
TIC
| Consulting Engineering Segment | $300.1M | 59% |
| Geospatial Segment | $131.3M | 26% |
| Fixed Unit Price Contracts | $54.3M | 11% |
| Other | $22.6M | 4% |
