GPU & Code AS
Not financial advice. The index, rank, signals and advice are rule-based indications from the latest filed annual accounts. They are not a credit rating, an assessment of management or a recommendation to buy, sell or do business with the company. Read more
Score · fiscal year 2025
57of 100
How to read this: the company is ahead of 63 % of companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025. What does this mean?
Rank in the Morning class Micro: 1,782 of 4,817 · What are Morning company classes?
Place in the whole sector: 2,664 of 7,315 · Informasjon og kommunikasjon
Profile
Cheetah · Sprinter
High profitability, lower resilience
Position against comparable companies in 2025, not a verdict on the company. Based on profitability 89 and resilience 25 out of 100 among companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025. Methodology
Against the sector
GPU & Code AS is 6 points above the median for companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025.
Median score 51 among 4,811 companies.
Against companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025: operating margin 53.4% (median 6.6%) and equity ratio 12.1% (median 39.5%).
How it has gone · 2024–2025
Revenue rose by 240 % from 2024 to 2025, to 5.1 MNOK. The operating margin fell from 98.9% in 2024 to 53.4% in 2025. The equity ratio fell from 62.9% in 2024 to 12.1% in 2025.
Amounts in the reporting currency. The full year-by-year table is further down under «Details». See every figure year by year
GPU & Code AS has a score of 57 for 2025, rank 2,664 of 7,315 in the sector.
Strongest: Profitability: percentile 89 against peers, operating margin 53.4% against a median of 6.6%.
Weakest: Liquidity: percentile 14 against peers, current ratio 0.70 against a median of 1.54. Solidity: percentile 20 against peers, equity ratio 12.1% against a median of 39.5%.
Worth a closer look
- Consider strengthening liquidity: current liabilities are 1.4 times current assets. Based on: current ratio 0.70 (median 1.54).
- Strong growth with weak liquidity. Is the growth financed, or does it tie up capital the company does not have? Based on: revenue growth 240.3% (median 6.5%); current ratio 0.70 (median 1.54).
- Receivables equal far more days of revenue than at comparable companies. Do customers pay late, or are these loans to companies in the same group? Based on: receivable days 96 days (median 46 days).
- What lies behind weak solidity, and will it last?
Written by fixed rules from the figures. Describes the figures, does not explain causes. Not investment or financial advice. How the summary is made
Worth a closer look
- watch
Consider strengthening liquidity: current liabilities are 1.4 times current assets.
Based on: Current ratio 0.70 (median 1.54).
- watch
Strong growth with weak liquidity. Is the growth financed, or does it tie up capital the company does not have?
Based on: Revenue growth 240.3% (median 6.5%); Current ratio 0.70 (median 1.54).
- watch
Receivables equal far more days of revenue than at comparable companies. Do customers pay late, or are these loans to companies in the same group?
Based on: Receivable days 96 days (median 46 days).
- watch
Current liabilities exceed current assets other than bank deposits, and the current ratio is weak. Is it customer prepayments and supplier credit that fund the operations, or short-term loans that must be renewed?
Based on: Net working capital to revenue −45.0% (median −9.3%); Current ratio 0.70 (median 1.54).
Indications based on the latest annual accounts from open data. Not investment or financial advice.
Financial costs were 7.9% of the debt in 2025. The policy rate averaged 4.30 % the same year. This is a plain description of what the debt cost, not a model of interest sensitivity.
See interest rates, prices and exchange rates for the sector
Data quality
No anomalies found in the figures.
Scenario analysis: the sector's weakest year
We have no accounts for 2022, the sector's weakest year, for this company.
The sector's weakest year was 2022, with a median operating margin of 4.1%. Based on the 8 fiscal years we have. The analysis grows as more years are fetched or imported. Methodology
What the score is made of
| Profitability | 89 | weight 40% |
|---|---|---|
| Solidity | 20 | weight 20% |
| Liquidity | 14 | weight 5% |
| Growth | 49 | weight 25% |
| Consistency | 41 | weight 10% |
Three goals: profitability 40%, growth 25%, resilience 35%. Why these weights?
Durability: 71 (average over 2 years)
Index version 3. Data completeness 100%: the share of the weights that had data.
The numbers behind the score
| Measure | Company | Median |
|---|---|---|
| Operating revenue | 5 MNOK | 3 MNOK |
| Operating margin | 53.4% | 6.6% |
| Profit margin | 48.6% | 6.8% |
| Return on assets | 55.7% | 13.1% |
| Equity ratio | 12.1% | 39.5% |
| Debt-to-equity | 7.29 | 1.07 |
| Current ratio | 0.70 | 1.54 |
| Revenue growth | 240.3% | 6.5% |
The median and “ahead of” refer to companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025. The bar shows the share of companies the figure is ahead of.
With an index of 57, GPU & Code AS does better than 63% of companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector (4,817 companies) in 2025.
Score 2024–2025
- GPU & Code AS
- Median: companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector
Working capital and debt
| Measure | Company | Median | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Working capital | |||
| Receivable days All current receivables, including those on group companies, in days of revenue. |
96 days | 46 days | |
| Inventory and other current assets, days Current assets other than receivables and bank deposits, that is inventory and short-term investments, in days of revenue. |
0 days | 0 days | |
| Net working capital to revenue Current assets less bank deposits less current liabilities, divided by revenue. Negative: short-term debt funds the operations. |
−45.0% | −9.3% | |
| Cash share of current assets How much of the short-term buffer is bank deposits and cash. |
47.8% | 56.5% | |
| Debt and interest burden | |||
| Interest coverage (times) Operating result divided by all financial costs. Below 1: operations do not cover the cost of the debt. |
7.7 | 9.0 | |
| Financial costs as a share of debt All financial costs (interest, currency losses and other) divided by all debt, interest-free debt included. Not an interest rate. |
7.9% | 0.8% | |
| Long-term share of debt Long-term debt as a share of all debt. A low share means more falls due within a year. |
– | 0.3% | |
Net working capital (current assets less bank deposits less current liabilities): −2.3 MNOK.
Of the financial costs of 0.4 MNOK, 0.0 MNOK is reported as interest costs in the accounts.
The median and the bar refer to companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector in 2025. The bar shows the share of the group with a lower figure: higher is not always better, long receivable days tie up capital, for example. These figures do not count in the score.
The industry or the company: what drove the result?
In 2025 the operating margin of GPU & Code AS fell by 45.5 percentage points. Comparable companies rose by a median 0.1 points. So the company did 45.6 points weaker than the industry, for reasons of its own.
| Year | The company | Comparable (median) | Change, company | Change, industry | The company's own |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 53.4% | 6.6% | −45.5 percentage points | +0.1 percentage points | −45.6 percentage points |
Comparable companies are those in the same industry and Morning company class. Their change shows what hit the whole industry, the sector drivers below included. The rest is the company's own: contracts, costs, one-off items or operations. The share is approximate, and we claim no cause.
The company and its sector's drivers
Prices, rate and currency that shape the sector's year, year by year beside the operating margin of GPU & Code AS. The figures stand side by side; we claim no cause.
Service prices: information and communication (indeks (2021 = 100))
Service prices: information and communication rose 4.0% in 2025; the operating margin of GPU & Code AS fell 45.5 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Service prices: information and communication, annual average | 100.0 | 103.3 | 108.7 | 112.2 | 116.7 | 120.0 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | – | +3.2% | +5.3% | +3.2% | +4.0% | +2.8% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | – | 98.9% | 53.4% | – |
Source: SSB (14335, CC BY 4.0). Source
Turnover index: information and communication (indeks (2021 = 100))
Turnover index: information and communication rose 4.6% in 2025; the operating margin of GPU & Code AS fell 45.5 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Turnover index: information and communication, annual average | 99.6 | 111.4 | 126.4 | 128.3 | 134.2 | 141.3 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +14.7% | +11.8% | +13.5% | +1.5% | +4.6% | +5.3% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | – | 98.9% | 53.4% | – |
Source: SSB (13863, CC BY 4.0). Source
USD/NOK (kr)
USD/NOK fell 3.3% in 2025; the operating margin of GPU & Code AS fell 45.5 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| USD/NOK, annual average | 8.59 | 9.61 | 10.56 | 10.75 | 10.39 | 9.54 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | −8.8% | +11.9% | +9.9% | +1.7% | −3.3% | −8.2% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | – | 98.9% | 53.4% | – |
Source: Norges Bank (EXR, NLOD 2.0). Source
Policy rate (prosent)
Policy rate fell 0.20 percentage points in 2025; the operating margin of GPU & Code AS fell 45.5 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Policy rate, annual average | 0.08 | 1.32 | 3.54 | 4.50 | 4.30 | 4.17 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | −0.28 percentage points | +1.24 percentage points | +2.22 percentage points | +0.96 percentage points | −0.20 percentage points | −0.12 percentage points |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | – | 98.9% | 53.4% | – |
Source: Norges Bank (IR, NLOD 2.0). Source
Consumer price index (indeks (2025 = 100))
Consumer price index rose 3.0% in 2025; the operating margin of GPU & Code AS fell 45.5 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consumer price index, annual average | 84.3 | 89.2 | 94.1 | 97.0 | 100.0 | 103.0 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +3.5% | +5.8% | +5.5% | +3.2% | +3.0% | +3.0% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | – | 98.9% | 53.4% | – |
Source: SSB (14710, CC BY 4.0). Source
Wage index: IT services (indeks)
Wage index: IT services rose 4.4% in 2025; the operating margin of GPU & Code AS fell 45.5 percentage points.
| Measure | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wage index: IT services, annual average | 84.9 | 87.8 | 92.3 | 97.3 | 101.5 | 105.4 (so far) |
| Change from the year before | +4.9% | +3.5% | +5.1% | +5.4% | +4.4% | +3.8% |
| The company's operating margin | – | – | – | 98.9% | 53.4% | – |
Source: SSB (12314, CC BY 4.0). Source
We show the drivers and the margin side by side and claim no cause. Sensitivity per company is not computed until we have at least 10 years of accounts per company: with three years such figures are false precision.
What the numbers say
GPU & Code AS had an operating margin of 53.4% and an equity ratio of 12.1% in 2025, and ranks 2,664 of 7,315 in Informasjon og kommunikasjon.
From 2024 to 2025: revenue grew by 240% and the operating margin fell from 98.9% to 53.4%.
This text is generated automatically from the 2025 accounts.
Three simple methods
The methods give between 1 MNOK and 20 MNOK.
| Method | Multiple | Estimate |
|---|---|---|
| P/E | 18.0 | 17 MNOK |
| EV/EBIT | 14.9 | 20 MNOK |
| P/B | 3.6 | 1 MNOK |
| EV/EBIT: from enterprise value to equity | NOK |
|---|---|
| Enterprise value (EV) at the listed multiple | 31 MNOK |
| Enterprise value after the size adjustment | 19 MNOK |
| Less net debt (rough figure) | −1 MNOK |
| Equity value | 20 MNOK |
Net debt is a rough figure: long-term liabilities minus cash. The accounts do not split interest-bearing debt from other liabilities, and short-term borrowings are not included. The size adjustment applies to the enterprise value, not to the debt.
The listed basis is the value at listed multiples. The estimate is lowered for size: a small-company premium of 4% on the cost of equity gives a value 38% lower. No separate marketability discount is applied, because the premium already allows for the company being small and unlisted.
The multiples are from the listed industry that matches the NACE code (62): Computer Services.
Not financial advice. The value range is a rough model estimate from listed-company multiples, not a valuation, a price target or a price offer. The actual value may differ greatly. Read more
A mechanical estimate from public accounts, not advice. A mechanical estimate from public accounts with listed multiples and fixed adjustments. Not a valuation and not advice to buy or sell. See the calculation
Questions and answers
How profitable is GPU & Code AS?
The operating margin was 53.4% in 2025, against a median of 6.6% among companies in the Morning class Micro in the same sector. Return on assets was 55.7%.
How solid is GPU & Code AS?
The equity ratio was 12.1% in 2025 (median 39.5%). Debt-to-equity was 7.29 (median 1.07).
What is the liquidity of GPU & Code AS like?
The current ratio was 0.70 in 2025 (median 1.54). Current assets did not cover current liabilities.
How does GPU & Code AS compare in Informasjon og kommunikasjon?
GPU & Code AS ranks 2,664 of 7,315 in Informasjon og kommunikasjon for 2025. Among companies in the Morning class Micro it is number 1,782 of 4,817. Revenue changed by 240.3% from the year before.
Competitors
The 8 closest competitors in the same line of business, placed in the same matrix as the sector page: profitability up, resilience to the right. These are the companies the competitor analysis and the strategy report compare with.
Each bubble is a company: this company and its closest competitors in the same line of business and size, the same ones the competitor analysis uses. Placement is 0–100 against the whole sector and Morning company class: further right is more robust, higher up is more profitable. Bubble size is revenue. The light bubble and arrow show where the company stood the year before. Pick a profile to see fewer at a time.
| Company | Profile | Operating revenue | Operating margin | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Genie IT Solutions AS |  Elephant |
5 MNOK | −33.0% | 30 |
| Deriveme AS · same municipality | Elephant |
5 MNOK | −3.5% | 38 |
| Fiesta Studio AS · same municipality |  Cheetah |
5 MNOK | 59.9% | 69 |
| Telescopeco AS · same municipality | Elephant |
5 MNOK | −238.0% | 38 |
| Matrix Systemer AS |  Beaver |
5 MNOK | −2.2% | 32 |
| GPU & Code AS (this company) | Cheetah |
5 MNOK | 53.4% | 57 |
| Rift Dynamics AS | Beaver |
5 MNOK | 7.5% | 54 |
| Drivstoffappen AS |  Lion |
5 MNOK | 30.4% | 76 |
| Bekken Productions AS | Lion |
5 MNOK | 39.6% | 58 |
The selection is the closest in revenue within the same industry code. When you order, you can swap competitors. Order competitor analysis
Group structure · 2025
2 companies in the group according to the shareholder register for 2025. A company counts as a subsidiary when a Norwegian company owns more than half of its shares.
Private persons own 100% of the shares in Nenakhovholding AS. Persons are not shown by name.
Nenakhovholding AS has not filed group accounts in open data, so the group has no index of its own. Each company has its own accounts.
The group in figures
- Sectors
- Informasjon og kommunikasjon (2 companies) 2 of 2 companies in the tree have accounts with us. Sectors are sorted by the companies' own revenue, which includes sales between the group's companies.
- Loss
- 1 company: Nenakhovholding AS
A subsidiary with negative equity or a loss may be backed by the group, for example with group contributions or guarantees. It is an indication of what is worth asking about, not an assessment.
-
Nenakhovholding AS
- Gpu & Code AS you are here
Read the figures with care: a company in a group can look strong because of group contributions, or weak because dividends go up to the parent. The figures are indications, not the full picture.
Source: the Norwegian Tax Administration's shareholder register 2025 (majority owner with more than 50 % of the shares). Voting agreements and ownership through other countries are not included.
From the Central Coordinating Register
- Org. no.
- 933926664
- Legal form
- AS
- Sector
- Informasjon og kommunikasjon (62.100)
- Purpose
- Levering av programmeringstjenester herunder utvikling og optimalisering av programvare, samt utvikle egne produkter og tjenester med basis i selskapets kompetanse og utøve annen virksomhet som naturlig faller inn under dette formålet.
- Morning company class
- Micro
- Employees
- 0–4 (not registered) Payroll costs in the accounts: 2.2 MNOK (2025).
- Founded
- 7 August 2024 2 years in operation
- Share capital
- 0.03 MNOK
- Business address
- St. Edmunds vei 25, 0280 OSLO
- Municipality
- Oslo rank 63–220 of 357 in Norway
- Audit
- Audit opted out from 15 August 2024
- Latest accounts filed
- 2025
- VAT registered
- Yes
- LEI
- 636700EEAHLKWXCY7W36 not renewed (lapsed)
Source: Central Coordinating Register, Brønnøysund Register Centre. The employee count is reported by the company and may be older than the accounts. See the company at the Brønnøysund Register Centre
Ownership and roles
Loading roles …
Source: Central Coordinating Register, fetched 5 November 2026. Only names are shown.
- Parent company
- Parent does not consolidate the company
Source: GLEIF (Global Legal Entity Identifier Foundation), fetched 31 October 2026. The parent is the one the company itself reported to GLEIF.
Shareholders (2025)
- Number of shareholders
- 1 (one owner)
- Largest owner
- 100.0%
- Split
- companies 100% · private persons 0% · foreign 0%
- Owned from the same municipality
- 100%
- Group chain
-
Owned by: Nenakhovholding AS (100%)
Ultimate owner: private person
The owner: the majority owner Nenakhovholding AS (holds 100%) made a loss in 2025. A weak parent can affect the subsidiary through group contributions, loans and guarantees. It is an indication to watch, not an assessment of the company.
- Nenakhovholding AS · 100.0%
The company is new in the shareholder register in 2025.
Source: the Norwegian Tax Administration's shareholder register as of 2025. Figures may be older than today's ownership. Private persons are not shown by name.
Error in the data?
Do you see an error in the figures or in how the company is mapped (sector, holding, group)? Let us know. Corrections require documentation.
Is this your company? Suggest changes or add information
Figures last fetched 9 November 2026.
Year by year · 2024–2025
| Key figure | 2024 | 2025 | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|
| Index | 86 | 57 | |
| Rank | 66 | 2,664 | |
| Operating margin | 98.9% | 53.4% | |
| Return on assets | 78.7% | 55.7% | |
| Equity ratio | 62.9% | 12.1% | |
| Current ratio | 3.56 | 0.70 | |
| Revenue growth | – | 240.3% |
Accounts
From the Brønnøysund Register Centre, in the company's reporting currency (NOK).
| Key figure | 2024 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Operating revenue | 1.5 MNOK | 5.1 MNOK |
| Operating profit | 1.5 MNOK | 2.7 MNOK |
| Profit before tax | 1.5 MNOK | 2.5 MNOK |
| Tax expense | 0.3 MNOK | 0.5 MNOK |
| Net profit | 1.2 MNOK | 1.9 MNOK |
| Financial expenses | 0.0 MNOK | 0.4 MNOK |
| Total assets | 1.9 MNOK | 5.1 MNOK |
| Current assets | 1.9 MNOK | 2.6 MNOK |
| Equity | 1.2 MNOK | 0.6 MNOK |
| Retained earnings | 1.2 MNOK | 0.6 MNOK |
| Total liabilities | 0.7 MNOK | 4.5 MNOK |
| Current liabilities | 0.5 MNOK | 3.6 MNOK |
Source: Brønnøysund Register Centre (Register of Company Accounts), fetched 9 November 2026, accounts id 6797280.
Further
Similar companies
- Paragon Features AS index 57, rank 2,660 · compare
- Hideous Monster AS index 57, rank 2,662 · compare
- Aql AS index 57, rank 2,663 · compare
- Iver Accelerate Solutions AS index 57, rank 2,665 · compare
- Tell&Tell AS index 57, rank 2,667 · compare