vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of UP Fintech Holding Ltd (TIGR) and GeneDx Holdings Corp. (WGS). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
GeneDx Holdings Corp. is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($121.0M vs $107.6M, roughly 1.1× UP Fintech Holding Ltd). UP Fintech Holding Ltd runs the higher net margin — 28.4% vs -14.6%, a 43.0% gap on every dollar of revenue.
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.
GeneDx is a genetic testing company that was founded in 2000 by two scientists from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Sherri Bale and John Compton. They started the company to provide clinical diagnostic services for patients and families with rare and ultra-rare disorders, for which no such commercial testing was available at the time. The company started in the Technology Development Center, a biotech incubator supported by the state of Maryland and Montgomery County, MD. In 2006, Bi...
TIGR vs WGS — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $107.6M | $121.0M |
| Net Profit | $30.6M | $-17.7M |
| Gross Margin | — | 69.6% |
| Operating Margin | — | -11.8% |
| Net Margin | 28.4% | -14.6% |
| Revenue YoY | — | 26.5% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | -424.9% |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.01 | $-0.59 |
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 | — | $121.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $116.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $102.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $107.6M | $87.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $95.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $76.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $166.4M | $70.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $62.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-17.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-7.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $10.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $30.6M | $-6.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $5.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-8.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $15.2M | $-29.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-20.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | 69.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 72.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 69.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 67.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 69.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 62.2% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 60.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 59.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | -11.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -2.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 8.7% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | -5.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 9.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -10.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 14.0% | -15.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -21.9% |
| Q4 25 | — | -14.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | -6.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 10.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | 28.4% | -7.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 5.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -10.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 9.1% | -41.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -32.4% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.59 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.27 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $0.36 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.01 | $-0.23 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $0.25 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.31 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.01 | $-1.10 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-0.78 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | — | $171.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | $54.5M |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | — | $308.2M |
| Total Assets | — | $523.7M |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | 0.18× |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $171.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $155.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $134.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $159.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $141.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $116.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $392.5M | $106.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $112.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | $54.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $54.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $55.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $55.5M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $55.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $56.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $56.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $56.3M |
| Q4 25 | — | $308.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $292.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $277.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $257.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $245.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $204.5M | ||
| Q2 24 | $501.2M | $194.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $207.2M |
| Q4 25 | — | $523.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $493.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $463.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $446.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $419.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $408.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $4.8B | $389.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $394.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | 0.18× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.19× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.20× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.22× | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 0.23× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.27× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.29× | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.27× |
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 | — | $-3.1M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | — | $-7.4M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | — | -6.1% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | — | 3.6% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | — | $14.3M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | — | $-3.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $15.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $10.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $10.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-3.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-4.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $155.1M | $-4.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-16.4M |
| Q4 25 | — | $-7.4M | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $9.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $8.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $4.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-6.2M | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-5.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $153.8M | $-5.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-16.9M |
| Q4 25 | — | -6.1% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 8.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 7.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 4.7% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -6.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | -6.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 92.4% | -8.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | -27.0% |
| Q4 25 | — | 3.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 5.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 2.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 7.0% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 3.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.8% | 1.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 0.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | — | — | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.96× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | -0.59× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 10.20× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | — | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
TIGR
Segment breakdown not available.
WGS
| Diagnostic Test Third Party Insurance | $101.1M | 84% |
| Diagnostic Test Institutional Customers | $15.5M | 13% |
| Other | $3.4M | 3% |
