vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of PicoCELA Inc. (PCLA) and Summit Midstream Corp (SMC). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
PicoCELA Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($252.6M vs $142.3M, roughly 1.8× Summit Midstream Corp). Summit Midstream Corp runs the higher net margin — -5.1% vs -125.2%, a 120.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. Summit Midstream Corp produced more free cash flow last quarter ($34.5M vs $-256.6M).
PicoCELA Inc. is a global technology company specializing in low-power, high-reliability wireless connectivity solutions, including Wi-Fi HaLow modules and edge network infrastructure. It caters to industrial IoT, smart city, retail, and smart home segments, with a primary operational footprint across Asia, North America, and European markets.
Summit Midstream Corp is a North American midstream energy firm serving upstream oil and gas producers. It runs natural gas and crude gathering pipelines, compression facilities, and produced water handling services, with assets across key US onshore resource basins.
PCLA vs SMC — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $252.6M | $142.3M |
| Net Profit | $-316.2M | $-7.3M |
| Gross Margin | — | 72.1% |
| Operating Margin | -114.8% | -5.5% |
| Net Margin | -125.2% | -5.1% |
| Revenue YoY | — | — |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-0.66 |
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 | — | $142.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $146.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $140.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $252.6M | $132.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $102.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-7.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-1.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-8.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-316.2M | $2.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-204.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | 72.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 74.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 74.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 73.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 72.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | -5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 3.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -3.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | -114.8% | 3.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -53.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | -5.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -1.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -5.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -125.2% | 1.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -200.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.66 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.13 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.66 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.16 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-19.25 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $456.8M | $9.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $1.0B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $354.8M | $546.2M |
| Total Assets | $1.2B | $2.4B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 1.91× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $9.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $24.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $20.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $456.8M | $26.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $17.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $957.0M |
| Q4 25 | — | $546.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $551.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $552.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $354.8M | $558.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $651.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.2B | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | 1.91× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 1.96× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 1.95× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.94× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 1.47× |
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 | $-245.6M | $53.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-256.6M | $34.5M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -101.6% | 24.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 4.3% | 13.4% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $44.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $53.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $26.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $37.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-245.6M | $16.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | $34.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $3.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $10.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-256.6M | $-4.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 24.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | -101.6% | -3.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | 13.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 15.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 18.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 4.3% | 15.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.89× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
PCLA
| Revenue from product | $179.1M | 71% |
| Revenue from SaaS, Maintenance and others | $42.4M | 17% |
| Revenue from product – related party | $31.0M | 12% |
SMC
| Rockies Segment | $86.2M | 61% |
| Mid Con Barnett Shale Segment | $39.4M | 28% |
| Piceance Basin Segment | $15.8M | 11% |
