vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Polestar Automotive Holding UK PLC (PSNY) and Rackspace Technology, Inc. (RXT). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Polestar Automotive Holding UK PLC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($685.2M vs $682.8M, roughly 1.0× Rackspace Technology, Inc.). Rackspace Technology, Inc. runs the higher net margin — -4.8% vs -44.4%, a 39.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. Rackspace Technology, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($56.0M vs $-709.7M).
Polestar Automotive Holding UK PLC, or simply Polestar, is a Swedish automotive manufacturer that produces electric cars. Principally owned by Li Shufu's PSD Investment, Geely Holding and Volvo Cars, the company is headquartered in Torslanda, outside Gothenburg, Sweden. With an "asset-light" approach in development and manufacturing, Polestar does not have its own manufacturing facility; instead it produces cars in facilities controlled by Volvo or Geely in several countries, including China,...
Rackspace Technology, Inc. is an American cloud computing company based in San Antonio, Texas. It also has offices in Reston, Virginia, as well as in Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, India, Dubai, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Germany, Singapore, Mexico, Toronto and Hong Kong. Its data centers are located in Amsterdam (Netherlands), Virginia (USA), Chicago (USA), Dallas (USA), London (UK), Frankfurt (Germany), Hong Kong (China), Kansas City (USA), New York City (USA), San Jose (USA), Shangh...
PSNY vs RXT — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q2 FY2023 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $685.2M | $682.8M |
| Net Profit | $-304.1M | $-32.7M |
| Gross Margin | -0.1% | 17.6% |
| Operating Margin | -72.6% | -0.5% |
| Net Margin | -44.4% | -4.8% |
| Revenue YoY | — | -0.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 41.6% |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.14 | $-0.13 |
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 | — | $682.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $671.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $666.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $665.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $685.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $675.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $684.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $690.8M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-32.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-67.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-54.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-71.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-56.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-186.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $25.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-640.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | 17.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 19.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 19.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 19.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 19.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 20.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 19.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 19.2% |
| Q4 25 | — | -0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -5.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -5.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -4.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -25.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -7.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -94.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | -4.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -10.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -8.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -10.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -8.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -27.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 3.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -92.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.13 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.28 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.23 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.31 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.20 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.82 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $0.11 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-2.91 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $1.1B | $105.8M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.6B | $2.7B |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-456.3M | $-1.2B |
| Total Assets | $4.3B | $2.8B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $105.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $99.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $103.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $128.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $144.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $157.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $190.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $282.6M |
| Q4 25 | — | $2.7B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $3.0B |
| Q4 25 | — | $-1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-1.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-949.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-756.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-787.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $2.8B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $2.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $3.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $3.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.4B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $3.5B |
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 | $-666.7M | $59.7M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-709.7M | $56.0M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -103.6% | 8.2% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 6.3% | 0.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $90.6M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $59.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $70.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $8.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $12.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $54.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $51.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $24.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-90.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $56.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $42.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-12.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $34.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $27.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-14.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-118.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | 8.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 6.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -1.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 5.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 4.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -2.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -17.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 4.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 3.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 2.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 3.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 5.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 4.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.96× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
PSNY
Segment breakdown not available.
RXT
| Public Cloud Services Segment | $442.2M | 65% |
| Private Cloud Service Segment | $240.6M | 35% |
