Competition & Peer Data API & CSV Delivery Connect to AI Assistant via MCP

Flux Power Holdings Inc's Competitiveness

A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Flux Power Holdings Inc (FLUX) against its publicly traded competitors: sales growth, net income, profitability, valuation and market share, plus each peer's market capitalization, revenue, income and employees. Free below: the top 5 peers. Subscriber access adds the full competitor list and CSV downloads.

Peer Data As of Q4 2026
Competitors Tracked
-
Publicly traded peers
Peer Group Market Share
100.00 %
vs 100.00 % a year ago
Revenue Growth Y/Y
-53.59 %
Q4 2026
Net Margin
-28.03 %
Q4 2026

Key Findings: Flux Power Holdings Inc vs Its Competitors

  • TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 41M vs -M combined for tracked competitors (100.0% combined share).
  • Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is decelerating (-20.5% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
  • Scale: Flux Power Holdings Inc ranks #112 of 143 companies by market capitalization in the Industrial Machinery and Components industry, holding 0.0% of industry market cap.
  • Peer revenue share: Flux Power Holdings Inc accounted for 100.0% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group, up from 100.0% a year earlier.

Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).

FLUX Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2026

Flux Power Holdings Inc generated 100.00 % of the combined sales of its peer group, up from 100.00 % a year earlier.

API endpoints for this dataset
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/FLUX/competitors
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/FLUX/relationships
https://api.csimarket.com/api/v1/companies/FLUX/similar
Programmatic access for models, analytics, and integration workflows.

For context: the Industrial Machinery and Components industry grew revenue 12.4% year over year, combined, vs -53.6% for Flux Power Holdings Inc. Flux Power Holdings Inc's share of combined industry revenue moved from 0.01% to 0.01%, a loss of 0.01 percentage points.

Flux Power Holdings Inc's Competitor Quality Breadth

Share of each group, trailing 12 months: profitable (net margin > 0), expanding (revenue growth > 0), growing faster than the industry's own median, and financially distressed (Piotroski F-Score of 2 or below).

Entity Profitable Expanding Above Industry Growth Distressed
Flux Power Holdings Inc - No No Yes
High-Confidence Competitors (3) 100% 100% 67% 0%
Similar-Size Competitors (10) 29% 63% 38% 22%

Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Altman Z-Score is not shown here: it is not populated in the underlying data for any company. Percentages are of companies in each group that report the relevant metric, not of the full group size.

Market Share of the Peer Group, Q4 2026

100%market share
  • Flux Power Holdings Inc100.0%
  • Competitors combined0.0%

Share of combined quarterly revenue of Flux Power Holdings Inc and its 0 tracked competitors.

See Flux Power Holdings Inc's full market share breakdown »

FLUX Stock Performance relative to its Competitors

FLUX Competitors (weighted) Percent change over the selected range

Flux Power Holdings Inc's Share Price Performance vs Peer Groups

Trailing 12-month total share price return, and the share of each group that outperformed the U.S.A. 500 over the same period. Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC.
33.3%beat U.S.A. 500
High-Confidence
(1 of 3)
0%beat U.S.A. 500
Similar-Size
(0 of 6)
Entity TTM Share Price Return
(group: median)
vs U.S.A. 500
Flux Power Holdings Inc -87.60 % Underperformed
Competitors combined (0) 40.4% 63.2%
High-Confidence Competitors (3) 40.4% 63.2%
Similar-Size Competitors (6) 40.4% 63.2%
Similar Growth & Profitability (0) 40.4% 63.2%
Peer Group Share Price Returns

TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Flux Power Holdings Inc's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.

Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation). Outperformance is trailing-12-month total return vs the U.S.A. 500 over the same window, not risk-adjusted.

FLUX Stock Performance relative to High-Confidence Competitors

FLUX High-Confidence Competitors (equal-weighted, 3) Percent change over the selected range

FLUX Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors

FLUX Similar-Size Competitors (equal-weighted, 10) Percent change over the selected range

Flux Power Holdings Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers

The lift equipment market has traditionally been dominated by major lead acid battery manufacturers, including Stryten Energy, East Penn Manufacturing Company, EnerSys Corporation, and Crown Battery Corporation. Recently, the market for lithium-ion solutions has expanded to include several larger companies beyond early-stage businesses, driven by double-digit sales growth in lithium-ion products. Key competitive factors in the market include performance, reliability, durability, safety, and price. The company cites its experience with lithium-ion technology, development capabilities, proprietary battery management system (BMS), and UL Listing for core products as sources of competitive advantage.

Flux Power Holdings Inc's Competitors Named by the Company

Competitive relationships identified from SEC filings and corroborating sources, each with a basis and confidence.
Competitor Basis Confidence Active Sources
Crown Battery Corporation Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
Exide Technologies Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
East Penn Manufacturing Company Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
Electrovaya Inc Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
Stryten Energy Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
EnerSys Corporation Named by the company 85% 2022 to 2026 3
Competitor Evidence Detail

Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Flux Power Holdings Inc's named competitors require a Commercial License.

Methodology: relationships are extracted from SEC filings (named-competitor disclosures) and corroborating sources. Named by the company = explicitly disclosed as a competitor; Inferred = derived from corroborating signals. Confidence reflects evidence strength.

Get the full CSIMarket dataset: Subscribe API License