IGT's FY2025 figures describe a business assembled during the year, not twelve months of an established combined group. The relevant financial entity is Voyager Parent, LLC, the privately owned parent associated with the acquisition of the former IGT Gaming & Digital operation and Everi on 1 July 2025. Historical earnings from the old listed International Game Technology PLC or pre-acquisition Everi cannot simply be inserted into a continuous Voyager growth chart.
Voyager’s FY2025 consolidated financial statements report US$1,322 million of revenue, a US$120 million operating loss, a US$331 million net loss and US$37 million of operating cash inflow. They also show investment and financing cash movements of several billion dollars associated with the transaction. These are differently defined measures; the loss and the cash inflow are not mutually exclusive.
This analysis uses Voyager Parent, LLC’s audited FY2025 US GAAP consolidated financial statements. The IGT corporate overview explains which business the name now denotes.
Which IGT financial statements are we analysing?
The present gaming group operates under the IGT name, but Voyager Parent, LLC is the relevant consolidated reporting entity. Its predecessor public-company name is an unreliable shortcut. The former International Game Technology PLC disposed of its Gaming & Digital businesses in the 2025 transaction and continued its lottery business as Brightstar Lottery PLC. Brightstar's annual results and share information are not the new private IGT's results.
Voyager's calendar-year FY2025 US GAAP consolidated financial statements, with a Deloitte audit opinion dated 29 May 2026, are included in IGT-UK Gaming Limited's Companies House accounts filing dated 13 October 2026. The company number for that UK filing is 04562679. Those dates should be understood separately: an audit-opinion date, a later UK filing date and the reporting year-end are not interchangeable.
There is also a critical acquisition-date boundary. Voyager existed as a legal acquisition vehicle before the closing, but the operating businesses were acquired on 1 July 2025. The financial statements consolidate the acquired operations from that date. Earlier incorporation of the acquisition vehicle does not provide a full year of combined trading.
| Reporting identity | What the figures can describe | What they cannot establish |
|---|---|---|
| Voyager Parent, LLC, FY2025 | Present privately held group’s audited reporting perimeter | A full twelve months of combined trading on a like-for-like basis |
| Former IGT PLC / Brightstar | Historical public issuer and continuing lottery business | Current private gaming group's full results |
| Standalone Everi, before 1 July 2025 | Earlier Everi gaming and FinTech economics | Current combined group's segment weighting |
| UK legal subsidiaries | Individual company or subgroup statutory position | Automatic consolidated Voyager totals |
For the transaction chronology, see IGT history and the Apollo acquisition.
IGT 2025 financial results at a glance
The following numbers come from Voyager Parent’s FY2025 consolidated financial statements, with all values in US$ millions.
| Metric | FY2025, US$m | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 1,322 | Recognised sales and service revenue within this reporting perimeter |
| Operating result | −120 | Operating loss after operating expenses and accounting charges |
| Net result | −331 | Loss after financing, other non-operating effects and taxes |
| Net cash from operating activities | +37 | Net operating cash inflow for the reported period |
| Net cash used in investing activities | −5,753 | Cash used in investing, dominated by transaction-related activity |
| Net cash from financing activities | +6,205 | Cash provided by financing, including transaction funding |
Revenue tells us the value recognised as income from the group's supplied games, equipment, digital services, casino systems and FinTech activities. It does not measure casino customers' stakes, ATM withdrawals or the entire amount of player funds handled by those systems. Our IGT business model analysis explains this supplier-versus-operator distinction.
The US$120 million operating loss is not the same as a US$331 million net loss. Interest expense and other items below operating profit can materially change the bottom line. Equally, a positive US$37 million operating cash flow does not turn the income statement into a profit. Accrual accounting, non-cash charges and working-capital movements can produce different income and cash outcomes.
There is no sound basis for treating US$1,322 million as a twelve-month run rate. Dividing or multiplying it to generate an apparent normalised annual figure would ignore transaction timing, seasonal activity and differences in accounting treatment. A meaningful comparison requires a carefully defined pro-forma period and the corresponding primary disclosure.
Why 2025 is not a normal comparison year
The group's chronology makes the problem visible:
| Point in time | Reporting significance |
|---|---|
| 18 July 2024 | Voyager Parent acquisition vehicle formed; incorporation is not a full trading-history start |
| 1 January-30 June 2025 | First half of the calendar year predates the simultaneous acquisitions |
| 1 July 2025 | Apollo-backed acquisitions of IGT Gaming & Digital and Everi completed |
| 31 December 2025 | First calendar year-end after the combination; consolidated balance-sheet snapshot |
One can compare some historical product economics across separate documents, but combining different entities' published sales is not a substitute for consolidated accounts. Everi's standalone quarter ended March 2025 and the former IGT PLC's figures refer to different structures, while the July 2025 transaction introduces purchase-accounting and financing effects.
Pre-closing management presentations sometimes contained adjusted, estimated or preliminary numbers for specific businesses. Such figures may be useful as transaction background, but they are not interchangeable with US GAAP consolidated revenue or earnings. Their definitions, assumptions and periods may differ from the signed financial statements.
The same warning applies to apparently continuous finance-portal charts under the old IGT or EVRI ticker. They may correctly reproduce their historic issuers' figures yet mislead readers who assume the post-July 2025 private company is the same listed security. The equity identity is explained separately in our IGT shares and listing guide.
Cash flow: operating money versus acquisition funding
In my view, the FY2025 cash-flow statement is where an ordinary corporate profile is most likely to go wrong. It shows a comparatively small operating inflow beside enormous investing and financing movements. The latter predominantly reflect building and funding the new group, not the recurring cost of supplying casino machines or online games.
| Cash-flow category | FY2025, US$m | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Operating | +37 | Cash generated after the year's operating cash movements |
| Investing | −5,753 | Investment outflow including acquisition-related consideration |
| Financing | +6,205 | External financing and capital-related inflows, net of associated outflows |
A transaction-shaped funds bridge
Operating activities: +US$37m
Investing activities: −US$5,753m ← acquisitions and other investing uses
Financing activities: +US$6,205m ← debt and equity financing, net
These three reported categories describe how money moved through the entity over the period. Their arithmetic sum is +US$489 million before any separate exchange-rate effects or other reconciliation lines. It should not be casually equated with the change in unrestricted cash without checking the complete statement, opening balances, restricted-cash presentation and exchange movements.
Acquisition purchases can dominate a company's annual investing cash flow even when ordinary sustaining capital expenditure is much smaller. Consequently, interpreting −US$5.753 billion as recurring annual capital spending would be a serious error. Conversely, +US$6.205 billion from financing is not sales, gaming revenue or evidence that the business organically earned six billion dollars. Borrowed capital and investor funding bring in cash while creating financing obligations or ownership claims.
This distinction matters when considering future cash generation. The relevant question is how much cash the combined operations can generate after the exceptional acquisition mechanics have passed, alongside interest, capital needs and any contractual payments. One transaction-shaped period cannot answer that fully.
Debt and balance sheet at 31 December 2025
Voyager’s FY2025 consolidated financial statements report the following year-end balance sheet. Again, these are US$ millions as at 31 December 2025, not current November 2026 balances.
| Balance-sheet item | US$m | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Total assets | 8,834 | Recognised resources and rights, including acquisition-created assets |
| Total liabilities | 6,782 | All recorded obligations, not only bank or bond debt |
| Total equity | 2,052 | Residual accounting interest after liabilities |
| Gross principal borrowings | 4,319 | Contractual debt principal measure |
| Carrying amount of borrowings | 4,129 | Debt recognised on the balance sheet after relevant adjustments |
The balance-sheet identity works: US$8,834m assets − US$6,782m liabilities = US$2,052m equity. This is an accounting reconciliation, not an estimate of the group's sale value. Intangibles and goodwill arising from acquisitions can make book assets especially different from readily realisable cash.
Principal debt is not the same as carrying debt
The borrowing note breaks US$4,319 million principal borrowings into US$1,850 million of senior secured notes and approximately US$2,469 million of term-loan principal. The notes are described as carrying a 9.25% coupon with a 2032 maturity. The debt's reported US$4,129 million carrying value reflects accounting adjustments such as unamortised financing costs and discounts. The difference is not a second loan.
| Debt concept | US$m | How to read it |
|---|---|---|
| Senior secured notes: principal | 1,850 | Component of total principal |
| Term-loan principal | 2,469 | Component of total principal |
| Total principal | 4,319 | 1,850 + 2,469; do not add carrying debt |
| Balance-sheet carrying debt | 4,129 | Alternative accounting measure of outstanding debt |
Interest and repayment risk are shaped by actual debt terms, rates, maturity dates and covenant conditions. A coupon on one note issue cannot be applied automatically across all term loans. Nor can the difference between liabilities and principal debt be labelled exclusively as interest-bearing borrowing: operating payables, provisions and other obligations also exist.
The numbers show a highly financed transaction structure, but they do not by themselves establish a breach of covenants or an inability to meet payments. Such conclusions require maturity schedules, facility terms, subsequent cash generation and a dated liquidity picture.
Liquidity is not the same as borrowing capacity
At the FY2025 year-end, the financial statements distinguish unrestricted cash, restricted cash and access to a revolving credit facility. Combining them without labels creates a misleading impression of immediately available cash.
| Liquidity measure, 31 December 2025 | US$m | Can it be called cash on hand? |
|---|---|---|
| Unrestricted cash | 468 | Yes, within the reporting definition |
| Restricted cash | 23 | No; subject to restrictions, separate from unrestricted cash |
| Revolver facility limit | 750 | No; committed borrowing capacity, not bank cash |
| Approximate undrawn availability after letters of credit | 735 | No; potential borrowing subject to facility conditions |
The distinction is economic as well as semantic. An undrawn revolver can support liquidity, but using it creates debt; it is not equivalent to money already held in a bank account. Restricted cash may be linked to obligations and cannot automatically be spent on general operations. The relevant financing documents must determine when capacity can actually be drawn.
Even adding US$468m to US$735m would produce only a theoretical cash-plus-available-capacity indicator, not a verified net cash position, freely distributable balance or covenant headroom. Total debt, cash and liquidity should therefore be quoted as separate measures with their reporting date attached.
What changed after the year-end?
The financial statements disclose several subsequent events in 2026. They indicate financing activity after the balance-sheet date, but they are not a substitute for a full later balance sheet.
| Date | Described event | What it supports |
|---|---|---|
| 2 January 2026 | US$100m term-loan repayment | A dated reduction in that facility's principal |
| 20 April 2026 | US$100m additional term-loan borrowing | A dated increase in that facility's principal |
| 30 April 2026 | US$100m repayment of secured notes | The notes' stated principal became US$1,750m after that action |
These transactions cannot be used alone to publish a definitive September or November 2026 net debt, total cash or leverage ratio. Between balance-sheet dates, cash generation, other repayments, working capital, fees and any additional transactions may change the position.
Debt-market documents may also describe ratings or loan pricing at specific dates. A rating reported as at April 2026 is not automatically the rating today; an observed interest rate for one loan is not the weighted-average financing cost of the whole group. Readers should avoid extrapolating from fragments.
How historic Everi and UK accounts should be read
Everi's pre-acquisition SEC filings remain useful for understanding its gaming and FinTech economics. Its FY2024 and Q1 2025 figures, however, belong to the old standalone issuer. A historic Everi profit margin cannot simply be used as a current private-IGT margin, and its revenue cannot be added to former IGT PLC reported revenue to manufacture a Voyager FY2025 comparative.
The same principle applies to British statutory accounts. IGT UK Interactive Limited (company number 03054588) and IGT UK Interactive Holdings Limited (06166744) are different legal companies. Their standalone reporting periods, ownership arrangements and accounting standards must be considered before comparing an individual UK income statement with US GAAP group accounts. UK results in pounds sterling should not be mixed with US-dollar group figures without an explicit currency method.
The reader therefore needs three labels whenever a number appears: entity, period and accounting basis. Without them, even an arithmetically correct comparison can have no economic meaning. A subsidiary balance sheet cannot be assumed to equal its parent's consolidated debt, and older public-company results cannot silently change legal owner at the transaction date.
What the results show and what remains uncertain
My reading is that FY2025 is principally an acquisition and financing baseline for the new IGT. The reported revenue confirms that operating businesses contributed during the period. The accounting losses highlight the cost structure of the combined and financed entity, while positive operating cash flow shows that accounting loss is not a direct cash-flow measure. The large investing and financing lines identify a deal-funded year rather than normalised annual capital expenditure.
The main questions for later reporting are whether operating cash generation improves on a comparable basis, how interest and mandatory debt payments affect that cash, how much investment the technology businesses require and whether management can integrate the gaming and FinTech operations effectively. The source set does not yet establish a complete publicly accessible, like-for-like FY2026 trading period or a current covenant-headroom calculation.
That makes the balance between opportunity and risk unusually important. Cash-generating gaming and payments contracts may support debt service, but customer demand, game performance, operator capital budgets, regulation and financing costs can all interfere. This is an editorial interpretation, not an official credit rating. Our IGT risks and opportunities page considers these sensitivities; IGT markets and licensing examines the regulatory environment that shapes underlying operations.
Conclusion
The useful answer to IGT financial results is not an old stock-chart revenue series. It is a dated reading of Voyager Parent's transaction-shaped FY2025 accounts: a half-year operating combination, losses on the income statement, positive operating cash inflow, acquisition-dominated investing and a substantial debt-funded capital structure. The next meaningful comparison requires later consolidated results and their accompanying notes, not a mechanical annualisation of 2025 or a merger of unrelated legacy issuers' figures.