vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Monolithic Power Systems (MPWR) and VEON Ltd. (VEON). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
VEON Ltd. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.1B vs $751.2M, roughly 1.4× Monolithic Power Systems). VEON Ltd. runs the higher net margin — 55.9% vs 22.9%, a 33.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Monolithic Power Systems posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (20.8% vs 5.8%).
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. is an American, publicly traded company headquartered in Kirkland, Washington. It operates in more than 15 locations worldwide.
VEON Ltd., also known as VEON Group, is a multinational telecommunication and digital services company. Headquartered in Dubai, the company is publicly traded on the U.S.-based NASDAQ stock exchange. VEON operates in six markets in Europe and Asia, including Bangladesh, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Specific brands include Banglalink in Bangladesh, Jazz in Pakistan, Kyivstar in Ukraine, and units operating in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan under the Beeline...
MPWR vs VEON — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q2 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $751.2M | $1.1B |
| Net Profit | $171.7M | $608.0M |
| Gross Margin | 55.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | 26.6% | 75.4% |
| Net Margin | 22.9% | 55.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 20.8% | 5.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | -86.3% | 583.1% |
| EPS (diluted) | $3.50 | $0.34 |
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 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $737.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $664.6M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $637.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $621.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $620.1M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $507.4M | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $457.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | $171.7M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $179.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $135.0M | $608.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $135.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $144.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $100.4M | $89.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $92.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | 55.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 55.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 55.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 55.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 55.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 55.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 55.3% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 55.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | 26.6% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.5% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.8% | 75.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | 26.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 26.3% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.5% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.0% | 27.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | 20.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | 22.9% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 20.3% | 55.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | 21.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 201.8% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 23.3% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 19.8% | 8.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 20.2% | — |
| Q4 25 | $3.50 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.74 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.81 | $0.34 | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.81 | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $25.71 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.95 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.05 | $0.04 | ||
| 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 | $1.3B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $3.5B | $1.5B |
| Total Assets | $4.2B | $8.5B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.0B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $862.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.5B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.3B | $862.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.3B | — |
| Q4 25 | $3.5B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.2B | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.1B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.0B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.4B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.2B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.1B | — |
| Q4 25 | $4.2B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.1B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.9B | $8.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $3.7B | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.5B | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.9B | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.6B | $7.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.6B | — |
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 | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $63.9M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 8.5% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 5.5% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | 0.61× | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $666.2M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $104.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $239.3M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $237.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $256.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $167.7M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $231.7M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $141.0M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $248.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | $63.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $196.8M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $189.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $216.0M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $102.9M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $197.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $109.5M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $232.1M | — |
| Q4 25 | 8.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 26.7% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 28.5% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 33.9% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 16.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 31.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 21.6% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 50.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | 5.5% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.8% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 7.2% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 6.3% | — | ||
| 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.
