Naas Technology Inc's Competitiveness
A competitive positioning analysis and financial ratio benchmarking of Naas Technology Inc (NAAS) 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.
Key Findings: Naas Technology Inc vs Its Competitors
- TTM: Trailing 12-month revenue of 27M vs 386M combined for tracked competitors (6.6% combined share).
- Trending: Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+300.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months), vs accelerating (+21.1%) for its tracked peer group.
- Profitability: Its -461.8% net margin compares with -415.5% for the peer group.
- Scale: Naas Technology Inc ranks #45 of 58 companies by market capitalization in the Specialty Retail industry, holding 0.0% of industry market cap.
- Peer revenue share: Naas Technology Inc accounted for 18.8% of combined revenue among its tracked peer group.
- Peer differentiation: Revenue per employee of $27.13M compares with $0.10M for the peer group (260.1x).
Every figure above is sourced and cited in detail further down this page (Market Structure, Profitability & Cost Structure, Productivity vs Peers).
NAAS Sales vs. its Competitors, Q4 2024
With a net margin of -461.75 %, Naas Technology Inc reported lower profitability than its competitors (-415.45 %).
Naas Technology Inc generated 18.84 % of the combined sales of its peer group.
Naas Technology Inc vs. its Competitors, Q4 2024
Net margin
Revenue run-rate vs trailing 12 months
TTM net margin
TTM = trailing twelve months. Run-rate annualizes the latest quarter (×4) and compares it to TTM. In millions of $. High-Confidence Competitors are named as a competitor directly in an SEC filing; Similar-Size Competitors are the closest peers by market-cap rank within the same industry; Similar Growth & Profitability Competitors are the closest peers by combined revenue growth, operating margin and ROIC, all independent of the competitor list.
TTM revenue, latest-quarter run-rate and net income/margin benchmarked across Naas Technology Inc and its 4 competitor groupings. Available under Commercial License.
| Entity | TTM Revenue | Rev Run-rate vs TTM |
|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Competitors combined | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
| Similar-Size Competitors (8) | $12,345M | +12.3% · Accelerating |
TTM revenue, run-rate and net margin benchmarking across Naas Technology Inc's competitor groups requires a Commercial License.
Naas Technology 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | - | - | - | - |
| Competitors combined (3) | ||||
| Similar-Size Competitors (8) |
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.
NAAS Stock Performance relative to its Competitors
NAAS Stock Performance relative to Similar-Size Competitors
5 Best-Performing Tracked Competitors, Trailing 12 Months
| # | Competitor | TTM Share Price Return | vs U.S.A. 500 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Strata Critical Medical Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 2 | Archer Aviation Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 3 | Joby Aviation Inc | 282.9% | Outperformed |
| 4 | Ehang Holdings Limited | 282.9% | Outperformed |
TTM share price return and U.S.A. 500 outperformance for Naas Technology Inc's best-performing tracked competitors requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months.
Naas Technology Inc's Comment on Competition and Industry Peers
Publicly Traded Peers of Naas Technology inc
Revenue and income for trailing 12 months, in millions of $, except employees| Company | Market Cap | Revenues |
|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | 2,123.28 | 27.13 |
| Joby Aviation Inc | 5,926.12 | 116.30 |
| Archer Aviation Inc | 4,064.84 | - |
| Strata Critical Medical Inc | 450.90 | 211.64 |
| Lilium N v | 28.42 | 0.05 |
| Ehang Holdings Limited | 0.65 | 58.16 |
| SUBTOTAL | 12,594.21 | 413.28 |
Sources: Naas Technology inc's official press releases and regulatory filings; CSIMarket.com's market research; and the financial filings and press releases of the other companies cited.
Updated on:
Focus of this report: publicly traded companies. Ten additional tables on Naas Technology inc versus competitors, including market share analysis, are in the navigation menu under Competition. To download the tables, please subscribe.
Naas Technology 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Disney English | Named by the company | 85% |
| EF Kids | Named by the company | 85% |
Filing basis, confidence, active dates and source counts for Naas Technology 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.
Naas Technology Inc's Business Segment Mix vs Peers
Revenue by operating segment or division, as named and reported by each company. Segment names are the filer's own and are not standardized across companies. Do not assume a same-named or similarly-named segment is defined identically between two companies. Shares are of each company's own total revenue and are not required to sum to 100% (intersegment revenue, unallocated items).| Company | Largest Segment |
|---|---|
| Joby Aviation Inc | Flight Services 100.00 % |
| Archer Aviation Inc | Reportable 100.00 % |
| Strata Critical Medical Inc | Logistics 66.53 % |
Source: operating segment revenue as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API, leaf-level reportable segments only (parent roll-up segments are excluded where sub-segments are separately disclosed).
Naas Technology Inc's Productivity vs Peers Comparison
Revenue and income per employee, trailing 12 months, in $; market cap in millions of $| Company | Market Cap | Revenue / Employee | Income / Employee |
|---|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | 2,123 | 27,131,000 | -125,278,000 |
| Joby Aviation Inc | 5,926 | 45,445 | -343,163 |
| Archer Aviation Inc | 4,065 | - | -3,958,911 |
| Strata Critical Medical Inc | 451 | 352,150 | 66,923 |
| Lilium N v | 28 | 376 | -3,288,288 |
| Ehang Holdings Limited | 1 | 290,804 | -192,309 |
| PEERS TOTAL | 10,471 | 104,309 | -577,109 |
Naas Technology Inc's Geographic Revenue Exposure vs Peers
Revenue by country/region as reported in each company's most recent filing. Disclosure granularity varies by filer (some report by country, others by broad region) and is shown as disclosed.| Company | Largest Market |
|---|---|
| Joby Aviation Inc | United States 60.01 % |
| Ehang Holdings Limited | West Asia 23.18 % |
Source: revenue geography as reported in each company's SEC filings (10-K/10-Q), via the CSIMarket API. Percentages are of that company's own total consolidated revenue for its most recent reported period.
Naas Technology Inc's Position in Industry Market Structure
Market-capitalization share and concentration across all 54 companies in Naas Technology Inc's industry classification, broader than the peer set above. Market cap in millions of $.Naas Technology Inc ranks #45 of 54 companies by market capitalization in its industry, holding 0.02 % of total industry market cap. The industry's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) is 1,761, indicating a moderately concentrated market structure (U.S. antitrust guidance: below 1,500 unconcentrated, 1,500 to 2,500 moderately concentrated, above 2,500 highly concentrated).
| Rank | Company | Market Cap | Industry Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jd com Inc | 38,908 | 33.43 % |
| 2 | Ulta Beauty Inc | 23,957 | 20.58 % |
| 3 | Dick s Sporting Goods inc | 12,065 | 10.37 % |
| 4 | Firstcash Holdings Inc | 9,510 | 8.17 % |
| 5 | Yunji Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 6 | Bath and Body Works Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 7 | Academy Sports And Outdoors Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 8 | Ezcorp Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 9 | Rh | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 10 | Bobs Discount Furniture Inc | 1,234 | 5.2% |
| 45 | Naas Technology inc | 18 | 0.02 % |
Market cap and industry share for the rest of Naas Technology Inc's industry peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation) across CSIMarket's industry classification, market capitalization as of 2026-09-28.
Naas Technology Inc's Same-Size Peers & Stock Performance
Peers chosen by closeness in market-cap rank within the same industry classification (not the named-competitor list above). Trailing 12-month total return, 3-month price momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio vs the broad U.S. market.| Rank | Company | Market Cap | TTM Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40 | Yoshitsu Co Ltd | 60 | -56.47 % |
| 41 | Rent The Runway Inc | 55 | -66.11 % |
| 42 | Weshop Holdings Limited | 52 | - |
| 43 | Sportsman s Warehouse Holdings Inc | 46 | -59.83 % |
| 44 | Live Ventures Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 45 | Naas Technology inc | 18 | -15.33 % |
| 46 | Redcloud Holdings Plc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 47 | Kindcard Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 48 | Eco Science Solutions Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 49 | Blum Holdings Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
| 50 | Leslie s Inc | 1,234 | 12.3% |
Market cap, return, momentum, beta and Sharpe ratio for the rest of Naas Technology Inc's same-size peers requires a Commercial License.
Source: CSIMarket API (daily market-structure computation); returns and risk metrics as of 2026-09-28. Beta and Sharpe ratio are versus the broad U.S. equity market, not this industry.
Naas Technology Inc's BCG Growth-Share Matrix
Relative market share (vs Naas Technology Inc's largest competitor by market cap) against industry revenue growth, using the standard textbook thresholds (1.0x share, 10% growth) a common framework, not a precision instrument.
Naas Technology Inc falls in the Dog quadrant: relative market share of 0.00x vs its largest competitor, in an industry growing revenue -1.3% (median, trailing 12 months).
Source: CSIMarket API (market-cap share and industry revenue growth). The 10% growth and 1.0x share lines are standard textbook thresholds, not derived from this industry's own distribution.
Naas Technology Inc's Competitive Forces (Porter's Five Forces)
Only the forces this data can support honestly are shown; the other three are marked as such rather than guessed.| Force | Assessment | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Rivalry | Moderate | Industry HHI of 1,761 (see Industry Market Structure & Concentration above) |
| Supplier Power | Not covered on this page | See Naas Technology Inc's dedicated suppliers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Buyer Power | Not covered on this page | See Naas Technology Inc's dedicated customers page for concentration and dependency data |
| Threat of Substitutes | - | No systematic data source for cross-product substitution exists in this system; not estimated |
Note: this is a partial, data-grounded application of the framework, not a complete strategic assessment. Rivalry and barriers-to-entry readings are mechanical translations of the HHI and capital-intensity figures shown elsewhere on this page, not independent judgments.
Naas Technology Inc's Industry Attractiveness & Competitive Strength
A CSIMarket composite, not a standard field: each axis is an equal-weighted average of three factors already shown elsewhere on this page (industry growth, industry profitability and rivalry for attractiveness; relative market share, profitability and growth vs industry for strength). Disclosed as a designed methodology, not a precision measurement.
Naas Technology Inc falls in the Low attractiveness / Low strength cell: Harvest / Divest.
Source: CSIMarket API, trailing 12 months. Each axis score is a simple 1(low)/2(medium)/3(high) average across its three inputs -- a transparent, disclosed simplification, not a validated academic scoring model.
Naas Technology Inc's SWOT
Every point below is a fixed rule applied to a metric already shown elsewhere on this page (Market Structure, Profitability, Valuation, Run-Rate, Stock Performance, Quality Breadth) not an independent strategic assessment. A blank quadrant means no rule was met, not that none apply.Strengths
- Latest-quarter revenue run-rate is accelerating (+300.0% annualized vs trailing 12 months).
Weaknesses
- Underperforming the U.S.A. 500 over the trailing 12 months.
- Low relative market share vs the industry leader (0.00x).
Opportunities
- A meaningful share of tracked competitors (33.30 %) show financial-distress signals, a possible opening to gain share.
Threats
No rule matched.
Methodology: mechanical, rule-based SWOT. Each bullet reuses a figure already sourced and cited elsewhere on this page; nothing here is generated narrative or independent analyst judgment.
Naas Technology Inc's Financial Strength vs Peers Comparison
Quick ratio, working capital, debt to equity and asset turnover, trailing 12 months| Company | Quick Ratio | Working Capital | Debt / Equity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | 0.09 | 0.33 | - |
| Joby Aviation Inc | 3.67 | 11.81 | 0.23 |
| Archer Aviation Inc | 8.90 | 15.77 | 0.04 |
| Strata Critical Medical Inc | 1.13 | 4.32 | - |
| Lilium N v | 0.32 | 0.84 | - |
| Ehang Holdings Limited | 0.36 | 2.07 | 0.31 |
Quick ratio = cash / current liabilities; working capital ratio = current assets / current liabilities; asset turnover = revenue / total assets. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Naas Technology Inc's Revenue and Income Growth vs Peers
Quarterly revenue and net income growth, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Revenue Y/Y | Income Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | Q4 2024 | -39.8 % | - |
| Joby Aviation Inc | Q2 2026 | +257,493.3 % | - |
| Archer Aviation Inc | Q2 2026 | - | - |
| Strata Critical Medical Inc | Q2 2026 | +2.4 % | - |
| Lilium N v | Q4 2023 | - | - |
| Ehang Holdings Limited | Q4 2024 | -6.9 % | - |
| PEERS TOTAL | +12.9 % | - |
Growth is shown only where both periods are positive. Peers in the Blank Checks industry are excluded.
Naas Technology Inc's Peers' Costs of Sales and Capital Expenditures
Context for revenue growth: peer costs and capex, year over year and quarter over quarter| Company | Period | Costs Y/Y | Capex Y/Y |
|---|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | Q4 2024 | -52.7 % | - |
| Joby Aviation Inc | Q2 2026 | - | +136.0 % |
| Archer Aviation Inc | Q2 2026 | - | +53.9 % |
| Strata Critical Medical Inc | Q2 2026 | +58.7 % | +2.8 % |
| Lilium N v | Q4 2023 | - | +209.7 % |
| Ehang Holdings Limited | Q4 2024 | -6.9 % | +13,537.4 % |
Naas Technology Inc's Returns and Turnover vs Peers
ROA, ROI and ROE (trailing 12 months), receivables and inventory turnover| Company | ROA | ROI | ROE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | - | - | - |
| Joby Aviation Inc | - | - | - |
| Archer Aviation Inc | - | - | - |
| Strata Critical Medical Inc | 12.18% | 13.34% | 14.27% |
| Lilium N v | - | - | - |
| Ehang Holdings Limited | - | - | - |
ROA = net income / total assets; ROI = net income / investments; ROE = net income / equity; turnover ratios use trailing 12 month revenue (receivables) and cost of sales (inventory).
Naas Technology Inc's Valuation vs Peers
P/E, price to sales, PEG, price to cash flow and price to book| Company | P/E | Price / Sales |
|---|---|---|
| Naas Technology inc | - | 78.26 |
| Joby Aviation Inc | - | 50.96 |
| Archer Aviation Inc | - | - |
| Strata Critical Medical Inc | 10.46 | 2.13 |
| Lilium N v | - | 539.93 |
| Ehang Holdings Limited | - | 0.01 |
| PEERS AVERAGE | - | 30.47 |
P/E = price / diluted EPS (trailing 12 months); PEG = P/E divided by EPS growth; the average row divides the peers' combined market cap by their combined income, sales, cash flow and equity.