ChargePoint reported a Q4 FY2025 revenue of $101.9 million, delivering a modest sequential top-line outturn and a meaningful improvement in profitability metrics on a non-GAAP basis. The company posted a non-GAAP gross margin of 30% and narrowed non-GAAP operating expenses to $52 million, driving the adjusted EBITDA loss down to $17 million—the fifth consecutive quarter of improvement. Management underscored ongoing cost rationalization, balance-sheet discipline, and a cash-burn trajectory that has materially improved versus prior quarters, supporting a runway toward positive adjusted EBITDA in a fiscal quarter of FY2026.
Operational highlights include a growing subscription base (up 14% YoY to $38 million in Q4), a large installed base of charging ports (342,000 ports managed by software, with 120,000 in Europe and 33,000 DC fast chargers), and the expansion of the GM Energy collaboration to accelerate GM-branded DC fast charging locations. The company reiterated that NEVI-related deals were insignificant to 2024 revenue and that policy shifts will not materially derail its growth plan. The balance sheet remains sturdy with cash of ~$225 million and an undrawn $150 million revolving credit facility, although CHPT remains in a cash-burn phase as it funds growth investments and pipeline development. Management guided Q1 FY2026 revenue of $95–$105 million, signaling a near-term stabilization around mid- to high-single-digit growth potential, with gross margins expected to stay around the 30% level.
Key takeaways for investors: (1) the trajectory toward positive adjusted EBITDA in FY2026 remains intact, supported by efficiency gains, automation, and scale benefits in subscription revenue; (2) portfolio diversification across North America and Europe, plus next-gen software/hardware initiatives, positions ChargePoint to capitalize on accelerating EV adoption; (3) macro policy and subsidy dynamics—while meaningful—are unlikely to derail the core secular shift to e-mobility given CHPT’s diversified manufacturing base and non-reliance on NEVI subsidies alone. However, risks around policy changes, channel inventory dynamics, permitting delays, and competitive intensity warrant ongoing monitoring.