vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of TIC Solutions, Inc. (TIC) and Upstart Holdings, Inc. (UPST). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
TIC Solutions, Inc. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($508.3M vs $296.1M, roughly 1.7× Upstart Holdings, Inc.). Upstart Holdings, Inc. runs the higher net margin — 6.3% vs -9.3%, a 15.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. Upstart Holdings, Inc. produced more free cash flow last quarter ($108.4M vs $37.1M).
Upstart is an AI lending platform that partners with banks and credit unions to provide consumer loans using non-traditional variables, such as education and employment, to predict creditworthiness.
TIC vs UPST — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $508.3M | $296.1M |
| Net Profit | $-47.2M | $18.6M |
| Gross Margin | 35.2% | — |
| Operating Margin | -3.8% | 6.4% |
| Net Margin | -9.3% | 6.3% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 35.2% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | 776.4% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $0.20 |
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 | $508.3M | $296.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $473.9M | $277.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $313.9M | $257.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $234.2M | $213.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $219.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $162.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $127.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $127.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-47.2M | $18.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-13.9M | $31.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-233.0K | $5.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-25.8M | $-2.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-2.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-6.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-54.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-64.6M |
| Q4 25 | 35.2% | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 32.2% | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 23.6% | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.6% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | -3.8% | 6.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1.4% | 8.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 5.8% | 1.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | -4.0% | -2.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -2.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -27.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -43.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -52.8% |
| Q4 25 | -9.3% | 6.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2.9% | 11.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -0.1% | 2.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | -11.0% | -1.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -1.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -4.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | -42.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -50.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | $0.20 | ||
| Q3 25 | $-0.08 | $0.23 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.05 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.03 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.01 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.07 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.62 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-0.74 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $439.5M | $652.4M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.6B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.2B | $798.8M |
| Total Assets | $4.4B | $3.0B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.74× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $439.5M | $652.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $164.4M | $489.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $130.1M | $395.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $155.7M | $599.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $788.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | — | ||
| Q2 25 | $751.3M | — | ||
| Q1 25 | $752.4M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
| Q4 25 | $2.2B | $798.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $743.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $722.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.1B | $676.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $633.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $595.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $594.7M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $612.8M |
| Q4 25 | $4.4B | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.2B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.2B | $2.5B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.2B | $2.3B | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $2.4B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $1.8B | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $1.9B |
| Q4 25 | 0.74× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.83× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.64× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.67× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
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 | $49.7M | $108.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $37.1M | $108.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 7.3% | 36.6% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 2.5% | 0.1% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | 5.82× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $61.3M | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $49.7M | $108.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $19.0M | $-122.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-6.5M | $-120.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $32.8M | $-13.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-110.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $179.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $65.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $52.6M |
| Q4 25 | $37.1M | $108.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | $10.3M | $-122.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-14.5M | $-120.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $28.3M | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $179.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $65.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $51.9M |
| Q4 25 | 7.3% | 36.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.2% | -44.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | -4.6% | -46.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | 12.1% | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 110.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 51.1% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 40.6% |
| Q4 25 | 2.5% | 0.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.8% | 0.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.6% | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.9% | 0.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.5% |
| Q4 25 | — | 5.82× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -3.86× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | -21.43× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | — | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
TIC
| Consulting Engineering Segment | $300.1M | 59% |
| Geospatial Segment | $131.3M | 26% |
| Fixed Unit Price Contracts | $54.3M | 11% |
| Other | $22.6M | 4% |
UPST
| Personal Lending Segment | $201.4M | 68% |
| Servicing Fees Net | $39.5M | 13% |
| Servicing Fees | $27.5M | 9% |
| Other | $15.7M | 5% |
| Borrower Fees | $8.4M | 3% |
| Collection Agency Fees | $3.5M | 1% |
