vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Monolithic Power Systems (MPWR) and Trade Desk (The) (TTD). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Trade Desk (The) is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($846.8M vs $804.2M, roughly 1.1× Monolithic Power Systems). Monolithic Power Systems runs the higher net margin — 24.0% vs 22.1%, a 2.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Monolithic Power Systems posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (26.1% vs 14.3%). Over the past eight quarters, Trade Desk (The)'s revenue compounded faster (31.3% CAGR vs 25.9%).
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. is an American, publicly traded company headquartered in Kirkland, Washington. It operates in more than 15 locations worldwide.
The Trade Desk, Inc. is an American multinational technology company that specializes in real-time programmatic marketing automation technologies, products, and services, designed to personalize digital content delivery to users.
MPWR vs TTD — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $804.2M | $846.8M |
| Net Profit | $193.2M | $186.9M |
| Gross Margin | 55.3% | 80.7% |
| Operating Margin | 30.0% | 30.3% |
| Net Margin | 24.0% | 22.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 26.1% | 14.3% |
| Net Profit YoY | 43.1% | 2.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $3.92 | $0.39 |
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.
| Q1 26 | $804.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $751.2M | $846.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $737.2M | $739.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $664.6M | $694.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $637.6M | $616.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $621.7M | $741.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $620.1M | $628.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $507.4M | $584.5M |
| Q1 26 | $193.2M | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $171.7M | $186.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $179.8M | $115.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $135.0M | $90.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $135.1M | $50.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | $182.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $144.4M | $94.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $100.4M | $85.0M |
| Q1 26 | 55.3% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 55.2% | 80.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 55.1% | 78.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 55.1% | 78.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 55.4% | 76.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 55.4% | 81.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 55.4% | 80.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 55.3% | 81.1% |
| Q1 26 | 30.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 26.6% | 30.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.5% | 21.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.8% | 16.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 26.5% | 8.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 26.3% | 26.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.5% | 17.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.0% | 16.2% |
| Q1 26 | 24.0% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 22.9% | 22.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.4% | 15.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.3% | 13.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.2% | 8.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 201.8% | 24.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.3% | 15.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.8% | 14.5% |
| Q1 26 | $3.92 | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.50 | $0.39 | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.74 | $0.23 | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.81 | $0.18 | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.81 | $0.10 | ||
| Q4 24 | $25.71 | $0.36 | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.95 | $0.19 | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.05 | $0.17 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.4B | $1.3B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.7B | $2.5B |
| Total Assets | $4.4B | $6.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $1.4B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $1.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | $1.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $862.9M | $1.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $1.5B |
| Q1 26 | $3.7B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | $2.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4B | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $2.7B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.1B | $2.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0B | $2.9B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4B | $2.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2B | $2.4B |
| Q1 26 | $4.4B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $4.2B | $6.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.1B | $5.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.9B | $6.0B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7B | $5.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.5B | $6.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.9B | $5.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.6B | $5.2B |
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 | — | $311.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $285.3M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | 33.7% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 3.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 1.67× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $795.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $104.9M | $311.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $239.3M | $224.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $237.6M | $165.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $256.4M | $291.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $167.7M | $199.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $231.7M | $273.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $141.0M | $81.3M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $63.9M | $285.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $196.8M | $158.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $189.5M | $119.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $216.0M | $232.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $102.9M | $179.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | $197.9M | $224.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $109.5M | $59.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 8.5% | 33.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.7% | 21.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 28.5% | 17.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 33.9% | 37.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.5% | 24.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 31.9% | 35.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.6% | 10.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 5.5% | 3.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.8% | 9.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.2% | 6.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.3% | 9.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | 10.4% | 2.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 5.5% | 7.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 6.2% | 3.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.61× | 1.67× | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.33× | 1.94× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.76× | 1.83× | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.90× | 5.75× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.13× | 1.09× | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.60× | 2.90× | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.40× | 0.96× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
MPWR
Segment breakdown not available.
TTD
| Other | $427.2M | 50% |
| Non Us | $419.6M | 50% |
