TAC InfoSec FY26: 88 percent Revenue Growth, Margins Held, and a Push Toward a Platform Model

TAC InfoSec Limited closed FY26 with a set of numbers that management repeatedly framed as “profitable scale.” Operating revenue rose to 57.26 crore, up 88 percent year on year. EBITDA increased to 30.75 crore, up 81 percent, while PAT grew 78 percent to 26.35 crore. The striking part is that profitability stayed stable despite growth and despite the end of a tax holiday that, as management highlighted, meant actual tax payment in FY26.

EBITDA margin came in at 53.8 percent versus 53.0 percent in FY25. PAT margin was 46.1 percent versus 46.0 percent in FY25. The investor presentation’s core argument is that TAC did not trade profitability for growth and that the economics resemble a platform business rather than a manpower-heavy services model.

The FY26 scorecard: growth converted into profit

The company’s presentation put the revenue-to-profit scale-up front and centre. FY25 operating revenue was 30.50 crore and FY26 operating revenue was 57.26 crore. EBITDA rose from 17.03 crore to 30.75 crore and PAT from 14.83 crore to 26.35 crore. In other words, profit grew alongside revenue at every level of the P&L.

A subtle but important detail is that other income did not drive the outcome. Reported net other income was -0.08 crore in FY26 versus 1.70 crore in FY25. TAC attributes this swing to fair-value movement on a small crypto treasury balance held by CyberScope for certain Web3 security payments. The deck states other income before the crypto fair-value impact was about 1.45 crore, but a negative fair-value movement of about 1.52 crore resulted in net other income of -0.08 crore. The message to investors is clear: FY26 profitability should be assessed as operating-led.

H1 was boosted, H2 was the real test

A major theme in the deck and concall was how to interpret the FY26 revenue curve. TAC argued that FY26 should not be read as a revenue miss. Instead, management positioned it as a transition year where the company absorbed acquisition-related costs, navigated temporary market shocks, and still protected EBITDA.

The company disclosed that H1 FY26 included two large partner-led orders valued at about 1 million dollars. With this uplift, H1 reported operating revenue was 29.5 crore. Management stated that excluding the exceptional component, underlying H1 revenue was about 20.4 crore. That implies a partner-led uplift of about 9.1 crore.

H2 operating revenue was about 27.8 crore. TAC highlighted two comparisons:

First, H2 FY26 grew about 53 percent versus H2 FY25, which was about 18.1 crore.

Second, when compared to the “normalised” H1 base of 20.4 crore, H2 showed about 36 percent growth. This is the company’s case for underlying momentum improving in H2 once the one-time uplift is separated.

Management also provided a “modelled” scenario to explain investor expectations. If H2 had grown at an H1-like rate, a model could have assumed H2 FY26 revenue of about 41.6 crore (18.1 crore base multiplied by 130 percent growth). Against that, reported H2 was 27.8 crore, leaving a gap of about 13.8 crore. TAC attributed this gap to mix normalisation after the partner uplift, Web3 and crypto market softness affecting conversion timing, and investment into CyberScope team expansion ahead of full revenue conversion.

Even under this model, TAC argued that profitability delivery was strong. They compared the reported FY26 EBITDA of 30.75 crore to an implied 40 percent benchmark EBITDA of 28.4 crore on a modelled 71.1 crore revenue scenario. The company framed this as outperformance of about 2.35 crore.

CyberScope and Socify.ai: multi-engine build, with timing risks

TAC’s longer-term narrative is a 2030 “platform architecture” with multiple engines. The presentation lists ESOF as the core vulnerability management and cyber-risk engine, Socify.ai as a compliance automation and recurring ARR layer, CyberScope as a Web3 and smart-contract security leader, and CyberSandia as a U.S. government and public-sector arm.

CyberScope was discussed as both a strategic demand story and a timing risk story. Management stated that H2 conversion was affected by crypto-cycle softness and referenced a broader global crypto sell-off and Bitcoin decline. Despite this environment, the deck claims CyberScope grew about 50 percent year on year, from 10.5 crore in FY25 to 13.64 crore in FY26.

The company also disclosed a meaningful capability build-out: CyberScope team expansion from 8 to 28 people. TAC presented this as a deliberate near-term cost increase to build enterprise-grade Web3 security capability across smart contract audits, blockchain security, exchange security, compliance, and protocol assurance.

Socify.ai was positioned as another growth engine beyond core vulnerability management. The deck states Socify.ai reached 100+ customers. In the concall Q&A, management resisted giving FY27 customer targets, but did share that the average customer spend for customers using Socify plus other subscriptions was 4,149 (currency not specified in the transcript). The company framed early traction as intentional and logo-focused, aiming for case-study customers before pushing for faster scaling.

Cash conversion, internal billing, and the disclosure challenge

The deck includes a cash collection datapoint: 45.64 crore collected against FY26 invoicing, representing around 80 percent of FY26 operating revenue. TAC presented this as evidence of healthy cash conversion.

It also notes subsidiary contribution mechanics: TAC InfoSec Limited (India) billed 14.57 crore to the U.S. entity for global delivery support, while stating that India remains the delivery and innovation partner to all entities.

A recurring investor concern in the presentation itself is explanation quality. TAC’s own slide says “the result is strong, the remaining risk is explanation quality.” That is a candid acknowledgement that investors may need better clarity on mix, subsidiary contributions, and the moving pieces of a multi-entity global setup.

This matters because some disclosures are not fully complete. One slide on CyberScope revenue mentions that exact split figures are to be inserted once final CyberScope revenue split is confirmed. That limits an investor’s ability to independently validate segment economics today.

The U.S. listing pathway: progress, rule-change disruption, and dilution questions

In the concall, management gave a detailed timeline of the CyberScope U.S. listing journey. They stated CyberScope received SEC approval on January 9. They also stated that a rule change meant the 5 million IPO route could not proceed after mid-January, and that they had only a narrow roadshow window.

Management said they are now pursuing a 15 million fundraise and are awaiting NASDAQ responses as of the May 20, 2026 call. They also acknowledged that raising 15 million could create an ownership and consolidation issue: if TAC’s stake falls below 51 percent, CyberScope would no longer remain a subsidiary. Management said they would try to maintain 51 percent ownership, but also indicated that the final structure is a board decision.

This is a meaningful area for investors to track because the listing outcome impacts capital availability, dilution, and the consolidated reporting picture.

Takeaways from FY26

TAC’s FY26 financial outcome supports its core claim of profitable scaling. Revenue grew 88 percent while EBITDA and PAT margins stayed stable, even as taxes normalised. The company also emphasised that profits were not driven by other income, especially with reported other income turning slightly negative due to crypto fair-value movements.

At the same time, the deck and transcript make it clear that FY26 included mix distortions. H1 contained a one-time partner uplift, while H2 faced softer Web3 conversion timing. Management’s framing is that H2 still grew strongly year on year and that the company protected EBITDA above an internal 40 percent benchmark reference.

Strategically, TAC is building toward a multi-engine platform model across ESOF, Socify.ai, CyberScope, and CyberSandia, with FY27 described as a shift toward monetisation through renewals, upgrades, and cross-sell. For investors, the two key questions remain execution and disclosure: whether monetisation per customer accelerates from here, and whether segment and subsidiary transparency improves as the platform narrative expands.

The story TAC is telling is not about one strong year. It is about whether a high-margin cybersecurity platform model can compound from a 10,000+ client base into deeper recurring revenue by 2030.