| Metric | Q1 '24 | Q2 '24 | Q3 '24 | Q4 '24 | Q1 '25 | Q2 '25 | Q3 '25 | Q4 '25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $0.6B | $0.7B | $0.7B | $0.8B | $0.9B | $1.0B | $1.2B | $1.4B |
| Rev Growth (YoY) | 20.8% | 27.2% | 30.0% | 36.0% | 39.3% | 48.0% | 62.8% | ▲ 70.0% |
| Gross Margin | 81.7% | 81.0% | 79.8% | 78.9% | 80.4% | 80.8% | 82.4% | ▲ 84.6% |
| Operating Margin | 12.8% | 15.5% | 15.6% | 1.3% | 19.9% | 26.8% | 33.3% | ▲ 40.9% |
| EV/Sales | 79.3x | 84.8x | 114.7x | 208.4x | 223.4x | 320.5x | 363.9x | 300.9x |
Palantir's Q4 2025 call was a triumphant, almost defiant performance, with management projecting supreme confidence bordering on hubris as they reported 70% revenue growth and a Rule of 40 score of 127%. The dominant theme was that value in the AI stack accrues not at the chip or model layer but at the orchestration, ontology, and enterprise deployment layer — a direct ideological shot at infrastructure and foundation model players. Alex Karp explicitly framed the competitive landscape as 'chips and ontology,' arguing that investing in commodity compute without enterprise orchestration destroys unit economics and creates no durable value. Analysts like Dan Ives from Wedbush were effusive and uncritical, reflecting a broadly celebratory sentiment with no meaningful pushback on valuation or sustainability of growth. Management's posture toward international markets and alternative AI approaches was dismissive, reinforcing the narrative that Palantir occupies a category of one.