vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Latham Group, Inc. (SWIM) and UP Fintech Holding Ltd (TIGR). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
UP Fintech Holding Ltd is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($107.6M vs $100.0M, roughly 1.1× Latham Group, Inc.). UP Fintech Holding Ltd runs the higher net margin — 28.4% vs -7.0%, a 35.4% gap on every dollar of revenue.
Latham & Watkins LLP is an American multinational law firm. Founded in 1934 in Los Angeles, California, it is known for its litigation, corporate, and regulatory law practices.
UP Fintech Holding Limited, operating under the Tiger Brokers brand, provides online financial services for global Chinese investors. It offers cross-market stock trading (US, Hong Kong, mainland China A-shares), fund management, margin financing and investor education for retail and institutional clients.
SWIM vs TIGR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q1 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $100.0M | $107.6M |
| Net Profit | $-7.0M | $30.6M |
| Gross Margin | 28.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | -10.7% | — |
| Net Margin | -7.0% | 28.4% |
| Revenue YoY | 14.5% | — |
| Net Profit YoY | 76.0% | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $-0.06 | $0.01 |
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 | $100.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $161.9M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $172.6M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $111.4M | $107.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $87.3M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $150.5M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $160.1M | $166.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $110.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | $-7.0M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $8.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $16.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-6.0M | $30.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-29.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $5.9M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $13.3M | $15.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-7.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | 28.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 35.4% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 37.1% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 29.5% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 24.6% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 32.4% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 33.1% | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 27.7% | — |
| Q4 25 | -10.7% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 13.3% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 14.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.4% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -14.9% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 8.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 12.5% | 14.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | -1.9% | — |
| Q4 25 | -7.0% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 5.0% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 9.3% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -5.4% | 28.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | -33.4% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 3.9% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.3% | 9.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | -7.1% | — |
| Q4 25 | $-0.06 | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.07 | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.13 | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-0.05 | $0.01 | ||
| Q4 24 | $-0.24 | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.05 | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.11 | $0.01 | ||
| Q1 24 | $-0.07 | — |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | — |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $279.8M | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $405.9M | — |
| Total Assets | $823.2M | — |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.69× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $392.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $279.8M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $281.1M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $281.5M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $306.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $281.5M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $282.8M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $282.4M | — | ||
| Q1 24 | $282.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | $405.9M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $408.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $398.4M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $381.1M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $387.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $416.6M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $408.1M | $501.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $391.8M | — |
| Q4 25 | $823.2M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $844.4M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $822.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $824.6M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $794.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $853.4M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $830.0M | $4.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | $808.6M | — |
| Q4 25 | 0.69× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.69× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.71× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.81× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.73× | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.68× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.69× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.72× | — |
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 | $23.3M | — |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $14.1M | — |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 14.1% | — |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 9.2% | — |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $38.0M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $23.3M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $51.0M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $36.0M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-46.9M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $6.2M | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $37.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $52.4M | $155.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-34.5M | — |
| Q4 25 | $14.1M | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $45.2M | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $29.1M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $-50.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | $-98.0K | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $33.2M | — | ||
| Q2 24 | $47.9M | $153.8M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-39.9M | — |
| Q4 25 | 14.1% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 27.9% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 16.8% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | -45.2% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | -0.1% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.1% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 29.9% | 92.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | -36.0% | — |
| Q4 25 | 9.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 3.6% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 4.0% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 3.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 7.2% | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 2.7% | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 2.8% | 0.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 4.8% | — |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 6.29× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.25× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 6.32× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 3.95× | 10.20× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
SWIM
| In Ground Swimming Pools | $50.2M | 50% |
| Covers | $37.0M | 37% |
| Liners | $12.7M | 13% |
TIGR
Segment breakdown not available.
