vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of SolarMax Technology, Inc. (SMXT) and WESTWOOD HOLDINGS GROUP INC (WHG). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
SolarMax Technology, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($46.6M vs $25.0M, roughly 1.9× WESTWOOD HOLDINGS GROUP INC). WESTWOOD HOLDINGS GROUP INC runs the higher net margin — 3.1% vs -1.9%, a 5.0% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, SolarMax Technology, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (623.5% vs 7.4%).
SolarMax Technology, Inc. develops, manufactures and sells high-efficiency solar PV modules and clean energy systems. It serves residential, commercial and industrial clients in North America and key Asia-Pacific markets, offering installation and after-sales support to boost low-carbon energy use.
Westwood Studios, Inc. was an American video game developer based in Las Vegas, Nevada. It was founded by Brett Sperry and Louis Castle in 1985 as Brelous Software, but got changed after 2 months into Westwood Associates and was renamed to Westwood Studios when Virgin Games bought the company in 1992. The company was bought by Electronic Arts alongside Virgin Interactive's North American operations in 1998. In January 2003, it was announced that Westwood, alongside Westwood Pacific, would be ...
SMXT vs WHG — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $46.6M | $25.0M |
| Net Profit | $-872.2K | $782.0K |
| Gross Margin | 2.7% | — |
| Operating Margin | -2.7% | — |
| Net Margin | -1.9% | 3.1% |
| Revenue YoY | 623.5% | 7.4% |
| Net Profit YoY | 77.7% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.02 | $0.09 |
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 | — | $25.0M | ||
| Q4 25 | $46.6M | $27.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $30.6M | $24.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $6.9M | $23.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.9M | $23.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.4M | $46.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $6.3M | $23.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $22.7M |
| Q1 26 | — | $782.0K | ||
| Q4 25 | $-872.2K | $1.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-2.3M | $3.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-1.9M | $1.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-1.3M | $478.0K | ||
| Q4 24 | $-3.9M | $3.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-9.6M | $-1.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-378.0K |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.1% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 8.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.5% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 19.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | -2.7% | 8.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | -6.9% | 8.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -25.7% | 3.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -16.7% | -0.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | -27.9% | 10.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | -158.4% | -2.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -18.4% |
| Q1 26 | — | 3.1% | ||
| Q4 25 | -1.9% | 6.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -7.4% | 15.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | -27.6% | 4.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -18.7% | 2.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -60.6% | 14.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -152.0% | -5.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -1.7% |
| Q1 26 | — | $0.09 | ||
| Q4 25 | $-0.02 | $0.21 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.04 | $0.41 | ||
| Q2 25 | $-0.04 | $0.12 | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.03 | $0.05 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.07 | $0.45 | ||
| Q3 24 | $-0.21 | $-0.15 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.05 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $8.0M | $23.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $-12.2M | $126.1M |
| Total Assets | $91.3M | $150.4M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $23.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | $8.0M | $47.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $5.7M | $41.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9M | $35.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $6.8M | $29.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $7.1M | $46.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $8.6M | $48.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $44.1M |
| Q1 26 | — | $126.1M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-12.2M | $125.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-11.8M | $123.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-15.1M | $122.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-15.9M | $121.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-15.1M | $120.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-10.9M | $120.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $120.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | $150.4M | ||
| Q4 25 | $91.3M | $162.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $58.7M | $154.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $38.2M | $146.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $38.6M | $135.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $38.6M | $150.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $43.0M | $151.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $147.4M |
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 | $-2.5M | $-2.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | -3.28× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $-2.6M | ||
| Q4 25 | $-2.5M | $18.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $3.4M | $8.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $220.7K | $7.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-601.1K | $-4.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-1.3M | $21.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $203.6K | $529.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.6M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | $18.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $8.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-4.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $21.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $519.0K | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $3.5M |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 69.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 34.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -21.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 45.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 2.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 15.6% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.0% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.1% |
| Q1 26 | — | -3.28× | ||
| Q4 25 | — | 10.29× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 2.29× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.08× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -10.25× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 5.69× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
SMXT
| Yabucoa | $35.9M | 77% |
| Other | $10.7M | 23% |
WHG
| Asset-based | $19.3M | 77% |
| Trust fees | $5.3M | 21% |
