vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of NaaS Technology Inc. (NAAS) and Voyager Technologies, Inc. (VOYG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Voyager Technologies, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($35.2M vs $25.9M, roughly 1.4× NaaS Technology Inc.). Voyager Technologies, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -130.4% vs -193.3%, a 62.9% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, NaaS Technology Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (121.2% vs 2.1%).
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.
NAAS vs VOYG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2024 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $25.9M | $35.2M |
| Net Profit | $-50.0M | $-45.9M |
| Gross Margin | 29.2% | -4.4% |
| Operating Margin | -144.2% | — |
| Net Margin | -193.3% | -130.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 121.2% | 2.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | 18.4% | -64.5% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.02 | $-0.75 |
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 | — | $35.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $46.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $39.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $45.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $25.9M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $-45.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-33.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-16.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-31.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-50.0M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | -4.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 21.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 15.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 18.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 29.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -60.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -52.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -144.2% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | -130.4% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -70.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -41.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -68.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | -193.3% | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $-0.75 | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.52 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.28 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-1.23 | ||
| 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 | $429.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-33.4M | $404.5M |
| Total Assets | $180.2M | $1.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $429.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $491.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $413.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $468.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $24.7M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $404.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $590.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $554.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-33.4M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $727.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $685.3M | ||
| 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 | $-39.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-66.8M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -189.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $-263.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $-39.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-60.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-15.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-30.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-25.7M | — |
| Q1 26 | — | $-66.8M | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $-54.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-53.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-88.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | -189.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | — | -116.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -135.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -194.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 97.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 126.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
