Prisma Global Limited is an India-based technology company operating in the AI-driven visual intelligence space. The company offers solutions such as face recognition, OCR (Optical Character Recognition), video analytics, and image-based artificial intelligence, positioning itself as an API and platform-led AI company. Its solutions are marketed to enterprises across sectors that require automation, surveillance, identity verification, and visual data processing.
At first glance, Prisma appears to be riding the AI wave perfectly—strong revenue growth, enterprise clients, and a futuristic technology narrative. But a closer look at its FY24–25 financials tells a far more complex and concerning story.
| Particulars | FY23 | FY24 | FY25 |
| Revenue (Cr) | 352.5 | 488 | 749 |
| EBITDA (₹ Cr) | 21.5 | 29.5 | 63 |
| OPM | 6.10% | 6.05% | 8.41% |
| PAT (₹ Cr) | 9.5 | 14.3 | 7.3 |
| PAT Margin | 2.70% | 2.9 % | 0.97% |
In FY25, Prisma Global reported 52% year-on-year revenue growth, with revenue increasing from ₹488 Cr to ₹748.82 Cr. For any technology company, especially one claiming to be in AI and APIs, this kind of top-line growth immediately attracts attention.
However, this is where the comfort ends.
Despite this sharp rise in revenue:
Net profit declined by 49%, falling from ₹14.34 Cr to ₹7.30 Cr
Debt increased more than 12 times
Operating cash flow turned deeply negative
In short, the company sold more—but earned significantly less.
The core issue lies in Prisma’s cost structure.
Between FY24 and FY25:
Revenue increased by ₹264.92 Cr
“Other Expenses” increased by ₹227.21 Cr
This means nearly 86% of incremental revenue was absorbed by additional operating costs. Add to this a sharp rise in finance costs due to higher borrowings, and whatever operating leverage one would expect from an AI company completely disappears.
This is the opposite of how a scalable technology business should behave.
One of the most striking observations in Prisma’s financials is its very low employee benefit expense.
For FY25, employee costs are only around ₹16–17 crore, which is extremely low for a company generating nearly ₹750 crore in revenue and claiming to run complex AI and software operations.
In a typical AI or SaaS company:
Employee costs form a large portion of expenses
Core intellectual property is built and maintained in-house
Engineering teams scale slowly but efficiently
Prisma’s numbers suggest the opposite.
A detailed look at “Other Expenses” reveals large spends on:
Front-end integration support
Software customization
Infrastructure and support services
Project consultants
Marketing and deployment-related costs
These are not incidental costs. Together, they form the largest expense block, consuming the bulk of company revenue.
The implication is clear:
Prisma is outsourcing a significant portion of its technical and integration work instead of building and scaling in-house teams.
In practical terms, this indicates:
Heavy use of project-based engineers and consultants
Customer-specific custom development
High variable costs that rise directly with revenue
This structure resembles a services or system-integration business, not a product-led AI platform.
True API and SaaS companies share common traits:
Customers self-integrate using documentation and SDKs
Incremental revenue comes at low incremental cost
Gross margins expand with scale
Prisma’s financials show the opposite:
Each new customer appears to require significant integration and customization
Costs rise almost in tandem with revenue
Gross margins remain thin
This explains why profitability deteriorates as the company grows.
Between FY24 and FY25:
Total borrowings jumped from ₹15.45 Cr to ₹208.89 Cr
Finance costs surged from ₹0.37 Cr to ₹18.88 Cr
For an API or software company—typically asset-light and cash-generative—this level of borrowing is unusual.
The debt is not funding long-term assets or product development. Instead, it appears to be used for:
Funding operating losses
Managing working capital gaps
Paying vendors and contractors
Supporting high integration and execution costs
This is reinforced by the presence of director loans, indicating that even promoters had to step in to support liquidity.
Despite reporting profits, Prisma’s operating cash flow is sharply negative, at over ₹70 Cr outflow.
This suggests:
Profits are not converting into cash
Receivables are stretched
Vendor payments and operational expenses are draining liquidity
Accounting profitability without cash generation is not sustainable over the long term—especially when debt levels are rising.
While marketed as an AI/API company, Prisma’s financial behavior suggests something else:
Revenue growth driven by project-based deployments
Heavy reliance on outsourced technical talent
Low employee base, high vendor costs
Limited operating leverage
Debt-funded growth
In essence, Prisma looks less like a scalable AI product company and more like a technology services and integration business with an AI label.
Prisma Global’s FY25 financials highlight a critical lesson:
Revenue growth alone does not create value.
Without:
A scalable product model
Controlled cost structure
Strong in-house IP
Positive operating cash flows
growth can actually increase financial risk rather than reduce it.
Unless Prisma fundamentally restructures its business model—moving away from heavy customization and towards true product-led scalability—its rising revenues may continue to come at the cost of profitability, cash flow, and balance sheet strength.
In the end, the numbers suggest a simple truth:
Growth is visible, but quality of growth is questionable.
