vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of NaaS Technology Inc. (NAAS) and Neptune Insurance Holdings Inc. (NP). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Neptune Insurance Holdings Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($37.8M vs $25.9M, roughly 1.5× NaaS Technology Inc.). Neptune Insurance Holdings Inc. runs the higher net margin — 0.1% vs -193.3%, a 193.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, NaaS Technology Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (121.2% vs 28.8%).
NaaS Technology Inc. is a leading electric vehicle energy service provider based in China. It delivers one-stop solutions covering charging network operation, software and hardware support for charging station operators, and value-added services such as charging location search and payment for EV owners, serving both enterprise and individual customers across domestic and select overseas markets.
Neptune Insurance Holdings Inc. is a specialty insurance holding company that offers a broad portfolio of property and casualty insurance products, with a core focus on residential and commercial flood insurance for customers across the United States. It serves both individual consumers and small to mid-sized business clients, using advanced data analytics to support accurate policy pricing and robust risk management.
NAAS vs NP — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2024 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $25.9M | $37.8M |
| Net Profit | $-50.0M | $50.0K |
| Gross Margin | 29.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | -144.2% | — |
| Net Margin | -193.3% | 0.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 121.2% | 28.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 18.4% | 0.0% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.02 | $0.05 |
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 | — | $37.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $44.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $33.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.9M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $50.0K | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $11.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $12.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-50.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 29.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 46.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 58.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -144.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 25.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 35.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -193.3% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.05 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $0.06 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $0.06 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.02 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $24.7M | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-33.4M | — |
| Total Assets | $180.2M | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $12.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $24.7M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $247.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-509.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-374.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-33.4M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $89.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $180.2M | — |
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 | $-25.7M | — |
| 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.
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $38.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $-25.7M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.38× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
