vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of AST SpaceMobile, Inc. (ASTS) and Planet Labs PBC (PL), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Planet Labs PBC is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($81.3M vs $54.3M, roughly 1.5× AST SpaceMobile, Inc.). Planet Labs PBC runs the higher net margin — -136.2% vs -72.8%, a 63.4% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, AST SpaceMobile, Inc. posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (2758.2% vs 32.6%). Planet Labs PBC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.9M vs $-330.7M). Over the past eight quarters, AST SpaceMobile, Inc.'s revenue compounded faster (942.2% CAGR vs 17.5%).
AST SpaceMobile, Inc. is a publicly traded satellite designer and manufacturer based in Midland, Texas, United States. The company is building the SpaceMobile satellite constellation, a space-based cellular broadband network designed to connect directly to standard, unmodified smartphones. The network is intended to deliver 4G and 5G broadband coverage globally, particularly in remote and underserved regions.
Planet Labs PBC, known as "Planet.", is a publicly traded American Earth imaging company based in San Francisco, California. Their goal is to image the entirety of the Earth daily to monitor changes and pinpoint trends.
ASTS vs PL — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q3 2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $54.3M | $81.3M |
| Net Profit | $-74.0M | $-59.2M |
| Gross Margin | — | 57.3% |
| Operating Margin | -175.0% | -22.6% |
| Net Margin | -136.2% | -72.8% |
| Revenue YoY | 2758.2% | 32.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | -106.3% | -194.7% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-0.19 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $54.3M | $81.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $14.7M | $73.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2M | $66.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $718.0K | $61.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.9M | $61.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1M | $61.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $900.0K | $60.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $500.0K | $58.9M |
| Q4 25 | $-74.0M | $-59.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-122.9M | $-22.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-99.4M | $-12.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-45.7M | $-35.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-35.9M | $-20.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-171.9M | $-38.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-72.5M | $-29.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-19.7M | $-30.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | 57.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 57.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 55.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 62.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 61.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 52.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 52.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 55.2% |
| Q4 25 | -175.0% | -22.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | -1109.0% | -24.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | -11692.1% | -34.4% | ||
| Q1 25 | -8838.4% | -31.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | -2733.6% | -36.9% | ||
| Q3 24 | -27494.0% | -64.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | -14568.8% | -57.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | -7902.0% | -57.6% |
| Q4 25 | -136.2% | -72.8% | ||
| Q3 25 | -833.7% | -30.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | -8598.1% | -19.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | -6365.7% | -57.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -1887.2% | -32.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -15631.5% | -63.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | -8061.1% | -48.5% | ||
| Q1 24 | -3946.0% | -51.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | $-0.19 | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $-0.07 | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $-0.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $-0.12 | ||
| Q4 24 | — | $-0.07 | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $-0.13 | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $-0.10 | ||
| Q1 24 | — | $-0.10 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $4.3B | $443.3M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.4B | $349.6M |
| Total Assets | $5.0B | $1.1B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $4.3B | $443.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.4B | $181.1M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.7B | $133.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.7B | $118.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.1B | $139.0M | ||
| Q3 24 | $946.7M | $148.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $544.5M | $107.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $408.9M | $83.9M |
| Q4 25 | $2.4B | $349.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $435.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.2B | $444.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $766.7M | $441.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $669.1M | $464.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $502.8M | $473.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $241.9M | $500.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $285.8M | $518.0M |
| Q4 25 | $5.0B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.6B | $696.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $658.4M | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.4B | $633.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $954.6M | $630.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $821.6M | $658.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $579.6M | $674.6M | ||
| Q1 24 | $501.7M | $702.0M |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $65.0M | $28.6M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-330.7M | $1.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -609.0% | 2.3% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 728.7% | 32.9% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $-1.1B | $40.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $65.0M | $28.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-64.5M | $67.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-43.5M | $17.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-28.5M | $-6.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-28.4M | $4.1M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-33.4M | $-7.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-16.2M | $-4.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-48.1M | $-6.8M |
| Q4 25 | $-330.7M | $1.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $-302.9M | $47.5M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-353.6M | $9.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-149.0M | $-17.9M | ||
| Q4 24 | $-110.5M | $-3.6M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-63.8M | $-23.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-38.4M | $-14.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-87.7M | $-15.7M |
| Q4 25 | -609.0% | 2.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | -2055.0% | 64.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -30592.0% | 13.9% | ||
| Q1 25 | -20752.4% | -29.1% | ||
| Q4 24 | -5814.3% | -5.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | -5795.8% | -37.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | -4261.6% | -23.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -17538.0% | -26.7% |
| Q4 25 | 728.7% | 32.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 1617.6% | 27.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 26831.0% | 12.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 16776.6% | 18.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 4317.5% | 12.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | 2756.8% | 24.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 2466.9% | 16.4% | ||
| Q1 24 | 7913.6% | 15.1% |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
ASTS
| Products | $44.4M | 82% |
| Other | $7.8M | 14% |
| Sat Co | $2.1M | 4% |
PL
| Defense And Intelligence | $49.4M | 61% |
| Civil Government | $18.8M | 23% |
| Commercial | $13.1M | 16% |
