vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of nCino, Inc. (NCNO) and S&P Global (SPGI), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
S&P Global is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($3.9B vs $152.2M, roughly 25.7× nCino, Inc.). S&P Global runs the higher net margin — 4.3% vs 28.9%, a 24.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, nCino, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (9.6% vs 9.0%). S&P Global produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.7B vs $4.9M). Over the past eight quarters, nCino, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (10.9% CAGR vs 5.9%).
nCino, Inc. is a global financial technology company headquartered in Wilmington, North Carolina. The company offers its cloud-based banking software and core banking platform. The nCino Platform is used by banks and credit unions, and enterprise financial institutions.
S&P Global Inc. is an American publicly traded corporation headquartered in Manhattan, New York. Its primary areas of business are financial information, analytics, and energy and commodities intelligence. It is the parent company of S&P Global Ratings, S&P Global Energy, S&P Global Market Intelligence, S&P Global Mobility, and the Indian credit rating agency CRISIL. It is also the majority owner of the S&P Dow Jones Indices joint venture. "S&P" is a shortening of "Standard and Poor's".
NCNO vs SPGI — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q3 2026 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $152.2M | $3.9B |
| Net Profit | $6.5M | $1.1B |
| Gross Margin | 61.6% | 70.1% |
| Operating Margin | 7.7% | 42.7% |
| Net Margin | 4.3% | 28.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 9.6% | 9.0% |
| Net Profit YoY | 224.5% | 28.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.06 | $3.76 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $152.2M | $3.9B | ||
| Q3 25 | $148.8M | $3.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $144.1M | $3.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $141.4M | $3.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | $138.8M | $3.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $132.4M | $3.6B | ||
| Q2 24 | $128.1M | $3.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $123.7M | $3.5B |
| Q4 25 | $6.5M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $-15.3M | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $5.6M | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $-18.6M | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $-5.3M | $879.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-11.0M | $971.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-3.0M | $1.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.2M | $991.0M |
| Q4 25 | 61.6% | 70.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 59.2% | 71.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 60.0% | 70.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 59.7% | 69.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 61.3% | 69.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 59.3% | 70.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 60.0% | 69.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 60.2% | 67.9% |
| Q4 25 | 7.7% | 42.7% | ||
| Q3 25 | -6.2% | 43.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | -1.0% | 41.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.1% | 41.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.6% | 36.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | -6.0% | 40.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.9% | 40.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | -2.6% | 39.7% |
| Q4 25 | 4.3% | 28.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | -10.3% | 30.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 3.9% | 28.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -13.2% | 28.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | -3.8% | 24.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -8.3% | 27.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | -2.3% | 28.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.9% | 28.4% |
| Q4 25 | $0.06 | $3.76 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.13 | $3.86 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.05 | $3.50 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.15 | $3.54 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.05 | $2.85 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.10 | $3.11 | ||
| Q2 24 | $-0.03 | $3.23 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.01 | $3.16 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $87.6M | $1.8B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $13.1B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $1.0B | $31.1B |
| Total Assets | $1.6B | $61.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.42× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $87.6M | $1.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | $122.9M | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $133.2M | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | $120.9M | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $257.9M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $121.4M | $1.7B | ||
| Q2 24 | $129.5M | $2.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $112.1M | $1.5B |
| Q4 25 | — | $13.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $11.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $11.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $11.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $11.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $11.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $11.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $11.7B |
| Q4 25 | $1.0B | $31.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $33.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $33.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $33.4B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $33.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $34.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $34.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.0B | $34.3B |
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | $61.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $59.7B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $60.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.6B | $59.9B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5B | $60.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.4B | $60.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.4B | $61.0B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.3B | $60.5B |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.42× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.34× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.34× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.34× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.34× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.34× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.33× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.34× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $5.1M | $1.7B |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $4.9M | $1.7B |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 3.2% | 43.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 0.1% | 1.2% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 0.78× | 1.54× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $59.7M | $5.5B |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $5.1M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $17.7M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $54.3M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.0M | $953.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.8M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.0M | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $54.4M | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $8.1M | $948.0M |
| Q4 25 | $4.9M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | $12.6M | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 25 | $52.6M | $1.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $-10.4M | $910.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $5.1M | $1.7B | ||
| Q3 24 | $4.6M | $1.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $54.1M | $1.5B | ||
| Q1 24 | $7.7M | $924.0M |
| Q4 25 | 3.2% | 43.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 8.5% | 37.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 36.5% | 36.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -7.3% | 24.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 3.7% | 47.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.4% | 39.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 42.2% | 42.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 6.2% | 26.5% |
| Q4 25 | 0.1% | 1.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.5% | 1.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.2% | 1.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.2% | 1.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.5% | 0.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.3% | 1.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.3% | 0.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.3% | 0.7% |
| Q4 25 | 0.78× | 1.54× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.28× | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.77× | 1.35× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.87× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 1.98× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.49× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 1.54× | ||
| Q1 24 | 7.02× | 0.96× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
NCNO
| License And Service | $133.4M | 88% |
| Professional Services | $18.8M | 12% |
SPGI
| Subscription | $1.1B | 27% |
| Other | $706.0M | 18% |
| Non Transaction | $602.0M | 15% |
| Indices Segment | $495.0M | 13% |
| Mobility Segment | $444.0M | 11% |
| Asset Linked Fees | $329.0M | 8% |
| Recurring Variable Revenue | $157.0M | 4% |
| Related Party | $46.0M | 1% |
| Non Subscription Transaction | $45.0M | 1% |
| Sales Usage Based Royalties | $30.0M | 1% |
