GMO Internet Group

Company history

Financial history 2000–2025 — revenue, cost structure, balance sheet, cash flow and key ratios, year by year →

Founded
1991
Head office
Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan
Listed
1999
Founder
Kumagai Masatoshi
Revenue · FYE Mar 2025
$1.9B (¥286bn)
Net profit · FYE Mar 2025
$107.6M (¥16bn)
GMO Internet Group: long-term performance & turning pointsSales (revenue) and profit-margin ratio
Sales (¥ bn)Net margin (%)

1991A voice-dial venture becomes an ISP

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
  1. 1991Voice Media founded in Tokyo by Kumagai Masatoshi
  2. 1995Renamed interQ; internet access at $0 (¥20) a minute
  3. 1997Enters hosting; head office moves to Shibuya
  4. 1998The 55-year plan — ¥10 trillion of sales by 2051
  5. 1999JASDAQ listing; domain business begins

Kumagai Masatoshi founded Voice Media in Setagaya, Tokyo in May 1991 to plan, build and sell equipment for two-way audio services running over NTT’s Dial Q2 premium-rate line — a billing network that charged callers by the minute and settled through the phone bill. In November 1995 he switched trades outright to internet access and renamed the company interQ. Signing up for a Japanese ISP then took weeks of paperwork, and nothing was sold by the minute; interQ reused the Dial Q2 rails so that a subscriber needed no mailed ID and no credit card, and was online at $0 (¥20) a minute.

The network behind it was rented, not built. Member firms and individuals installed and ran the access points and shared the connection revenue — a franchised ISP that reached 51 points of presence nationwide within six weeks while the capital spending stayed off interQ’s books. Hosting followed in November 1997, and with it a move to Shibuya. Six years in, the company had two subscription businesses that customers rarely cancel, and it was selling the line directly to the end user in an industry where advertising agencies and telephone companies had held that access.

In 1998, with revenue still in the low billions of yen, Kumagai wrote a 55-year plan: ¥10 trillion of sales and ¥1 trillion of ordinary profit by 2051. Most of his listed contemporaries published a first medium-term plan at IPO; GMO had a half-century of numbers while still private. The listing came in August 1999 — the first independent internet venture in Japan to go public, and one that met the earnings tests on its own operating profit rather than on a trading house’s or a carrier’s capital. A domain business started the following month, completing the access–hosting–domain stack that still sits under everything else.

Read the full history in Japanese →


2000A group built to be listed

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY2000 · unconsolidated
Revenue$74M
Net income$11M
Net margin15%
FY2004 · unconsolidated
Revenue$217M
Net income$24M
Net margin11.1%
  1. 2000MagClick lists on Nasdaq Japan — the first listed subsidiary
  2. 2001Renamed Global Media Online; Ile acquired by share exchange
  3. 2004Parent moves to the TSE Second Section
  4. 2004Card Commerce Service — the future GMO Payment Gateway — acquired

In September 2000 the subsidiary MagClick — later GMO AD Partners, and later still GMO Internet, Inc. — listed on Nasdaq Japan at the Osaka exchange. Nine years from founding, the group already had two tiers of listed equity, and a way of funding growth that did not run through the parent’s balance sheet. In April 2001 the company renamed itself Global Media Online, folding the initials GMO into the corporate name, and the following month took Ile (now GMO GlobalSign Holdings) private-to-group by share exchange to deepen hosting.

Acquiring by share exchange became the habit, and the GMO brand spread across the subsidiaries as they were renamed. In February 2004 the parent moved from JASDAQ to the Second Section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange. A month later it bought into paperboy&co. (now GMO Pepabo), reaching the consumer end of hosting, and in September it acquired Card Commerce Service — the company that, renamed GMO Payment Gateway, would become the group’s single largest profit engine. The core of the next twenty years was assembled before anyone called it a core.

Read the full history in Japanese →


2005Consumer lending, and the ¥40 billion lesson

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY2005 · unconsolidated
Revenue$338M
Net income$30M
Net margin8.9%
FY2015 · consolidated
Revenue$1.0B
Net income$111M
Net margin10.6%
  1. 2005Enters consumer lending; parent moves to the TSE First Section
  2. 2006Money Lending Business Act revised — grey-zone interest abolished
  3. 2007Lending business sold in an MBO for $44,833 (¥5m); equity ratio 0.5%
  4. 2007Kumagai funds a $50.1M (¥6bn) capital increase from his own assets
  5. 2010Re-enters brokerage via Click Securities
  6. 2015Seven listed group companies; revenue $1.0B (¥126bn)

2005 was both the year the model set and the year it overreached. GMO Payment Gateway listed on Mothers in April, the parent reached the TSE First Section in June, and GMO Hosting & Security listed on Mothers in December — three group companies on Tokyo exchanges in a single year, each with its own share price to raise money and pay people with. In the same months GMO bought 94.28% of the consumer lender Orient Shinpan for $227.3M (¥25bn), committed roughly $254.2M (¥28bn) against a target of ¥50 billion in loan balances, and set up an online brokerage.

The premise under that purchase was then rewritten from outside. The December 2006 revision of the Money Lending Business Act abolished grey-zone interest, refund claims surged, and auditors required provisioning against ten years of past interest: $89.2M (¥11bn) was booked and another ¥20 billion was still needed. Revenue grew 37% to ¥50.8 billion in FY06 and the group still lost ¥12.1 billion; FY07 brought a net loss of $149.4M (¥18bn), the largest in its history. At the June 2007 interim, net assets fell from ¥19.5 billion to ¥7.7 billion and the equity ratio from 7.7% to 0.5% — a company that had listed on its own operating profit was standing just short of negative net worth.

In August 2007 GMO sold the lending business to its own managers in an MBO for a symbolic $44,833 (¥5m); counting unrecoverable loans and investments, the total loss came to about $339.6M (¥40bn). Kumagai raised cash where he could — roughly 10% of GMO Hosting & Security, the eBank stake, all of GMO Internet Securities — then, at the end of the year, contributed his own property in kind and borrowed $25.5M (¥3bn) personally to fund a $50.1M (¥6bn) capital increase. A founder repairing a listed company’s capital out of his own pocket is not a common event in Japan, and out of it came the rule that has governed every commitment since: never risk more than a third of assets.

What followed was eight years of rebuilding on the businesses that could not be rewritten by regulation. GMO Payment Gateway moved to the First Section in 2008 and Pepabo listed the same year; the brokerage that had been sold in 2007 was re-entered in 2010 through Click Securities, then widened with FX Prime in 2012. Four more subsidiaries listed between October 2014 and October 2015, bringing the group to seven listed companies. FY15 closed at $1.0B (¥126bn) of revenue and $122.3M (¥15bn) of operating profit, with infrastructure and security together producing 95% of that profit.

Read the full history in Japanese →


2016Finance again, and a holding company

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY2016 · consolidated
Revenue$1.2B
Net income$66M
Net margin5.3%
FY2025 · consolidated
Revenue$1.9B
Net income$108M
Net margin5.6%
  1. 2017Crypto exchange, then crypto mining
  2. 2018GMO Aozora Net Bank opens; $337.7M (¥37bn) mining write-off
  3. 2022Renamed GMO Internet Group; parent moves to the TSE Prime Market
  4. 2024GMO AI & Robotics Shoji founded
  5. 2025Operating businesses hived off; the parent becomes a holding company

GMO went back into finance by a route it could survive. In 2016 it agreed with Aozora Bank to run an internet bank jointly and took a stake in Aozora Trust Bank; that became GMO Aozora Net Bank, which opened for business in July 2018. Crypto came in between — an exchange in September 2017, mining that December — and by 2018 payments, FX, a bank and crypto formed a financial stack around the infrastructure businesses.

Mining then tested the rule. Falling coin prices and semiconductor costs forced a special loss of $337.7M (¥37bn) in FY18 and a net loss of ¥20.7 billion, the worst since 2007. But the shape of the damage was different: operating profit that year reached a record ¥21.7 billion, because the subscription core had never been staked. The third-of-assets limit had held the new venture to a size the group could absorb, and the two-layer structure — bedrock businesses funded heavily, new fields capped — became the explicit form of GMO’s capital discipline. Acquiring YJFX (now GMO Gaika) in 2021 and issuing the GYEN and ZUSD stablecoins under US licences extended finance without repeating 2005.

The name caught up with the structure in September 2022, when the parent became GMO Internet Group — its fourth name, and one that had to distinguish it from the operating subsidiary already called GMO Internet. That April the TSE’s market reorganization had put the parent on the Prime Market and sorted nine subsidiaries across Prime, Standard and Growth. Cybersecurity was added by acquisition — Ierae Security in 2022, Flatt Security in 2024 — and GMO AI & Robotics Shoji followed in June 2024, positioned by Kumagai as “glue” between the AI and robot industries: infrastructure, not manufacturing.

In January 2025 the parent hived off everything it still operated — domains, cloud, hosting, ISP and ad media — into the former MagClick, which took the name GMO Internet, Inc. and moved to the Prime Market under its own code. The founding operating name passed down to a grandchild company and the parent became a holding company with no business of its own, so that decisions on AI and robotics would not queue behind running an ISP. FY25 closed at $1.9B (¥286bn) of revenue and $394.9M (¥59bn) of operating profit — a fifteenth consecutive year of revenue growth and a record operating profit, absorbing ¥9.5 billion of provisions and exit costs in Thai brokerage, across more than twelve listed subsidiaries.

Read the full history in Japanese →


Key decisions — the author’s view

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY1999

The first independent internet provider to go public (1999)

Between ¥4,200 and ¥21,000

The gap between an offer price of $37 (¥4,200) and a first trade at $184 (¥21,000) was the price the market of summer 1999 put on the word “internet.” But the company was able to collect that price because of four years in which it had turned Dial Q2’s billing network into a way of collecting connection fees, pushed capital spending outside itself by having franchisees hold the access points, and gone on earning a profit month after month. Five people prepared the listing, the president among them, and four of them had never done the work before. That it reached the over-the-counter market not by first assembling people versed in the rules but by filling in the forms while running says something about this company’s speed.

The listing also set the premises of later decisions. Holding equity as a currency, it put a subsidiary on a different market the following year, and thereafter made welcoming companies in by share exchange routine. What it obtained in 1999 was less the ¥120 billion valuation than permission to use the capital markets over and over. In June 2005 it climbed the last step to the TSE First Section — and that autumn it decided to enter financial services, staking the credit built up in the public markets on a different kind of bet.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2000

Listing the subsidiaries one by one: the multi-listing group model (2000)

What separation protected

Splitting the equity business by business can be read as a device for pushing the contest over money and people outward, to the market. The payments company gathers people on the payments share price; the hosting company builds its pay packages on the hosting share price. The parent has less allocation to arbitrate, and each company’s managers answer to their own share price. It is also, by design, a structure that takes on in advance the situations in which minority shareholders’ interests diverge from the parent’s — and to that objection GMO has answered not by folding the model up but by listing more companies.

There were moments when having separated paid off. When losses in consumer lending brought the parent to the edge of negative net worth in 2007, what it turned into cash was about 10% of GMO Hosting & Security, its eBank shares, and the whole of GMO Internet Securities. Because it held subsidiary shares that carried a market price, it did not have to sell itself. The reason the number of listed subsidiaries keeps rising is written more plainly in the cash management of late 2007 than in any statement of philosophy.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2007

Into consumer lending, and out again two years later (2007)

What a price tag of ¥5.28 million showed

Letting go for $44,833 (¥5m) of a company bought for ¥25 billion is less an error of valuation than a case of the premise behind the valuation being rewritten from outside. At the time of purchase Orient Shinpan was earning about ¥1.3 billion a year at the bottom line, and its loan book of ¥80.9 billion was real. What collapsed was the premise that interest already received need not be returned. Change one reading of the rules and not only the value of the asset you bought but the profit and loss of the years before you bought it are rewritten retroactively — GMO verified the nature of the money-lending business in its own accounts.

What the retreat left behind was a discipline, and the structure that made the discipline possible. The promise to hold the maximum committed investment to a third of assets protected operating profit in the core business even when crypto mining produced a special loss of $337.7M (¥37bn) in 2018. And what could be turned into cash at the end of 2007 was the stock of a hosting subsidiary, the stock of a brokerage subsidiary, and a holding in eBank. Having divided the businesses into separate companies with market prices attached is why the parent never had to be sold off in pieces. In this company, dispersion meant something as a cash-flow reality before it meant anything as a philosophy.

Each heading links to the full Japanese analysis — background, decision and outcome, with sources.


References & sources

This is a condensed English edition. The full, source-by-source history — with the detailed narrative, financial tables, shareholders and executives — is maintained in Japanese: 日本語版(詳細)— GMO Internet Group full history in Japanese →

  1. GMO Internet Group — 有価証券報告書 (annual securities reports), including the corporate chronology (沿革).
  2. GMO Internet Group — corporate history and management policy (GMOインターネットグループ社史・経営方針).
  3. GMO Internet Group — earnings briefing (決算説明会), fiscal year ended December 2025, and the accompanying Q&A.
  4. Keieisha Tsushin Online — 経営者通信Online, September 2010 (Kumagai Masatoshi on the withdrawal from consumer lending).
  5. FastGrow — 27 July 2020 (on the 55-year plan and the group listing model).

Yen amounts are converted at the average rate of each figure’s own year — not today’s rate; revenue charts are shown in yen. Exchange rates & sources — the full ¥/US$ table →


Disclaimer


Data API

GMO Internet Group’s history, financials, executives and shareholders are published as static JSON — no key, plain GET.

Method Endpoint Returns
GET /api/companies.json All companies
GET /api/9449/manifest.json Resource index
GET /api/9449/history.json History overview
GET /api/9449/timeline.json Chronology
GET /api/decisions.json All management decisions (index)
GET /api/9449/decisions.json Management decisions (index)
GET /api/9449/decisions/{slug}.json One decision (full dossier)
GET /api/9449/executives.json Executives
GET /api/9449/shareholders.json Major shareholders
GET /api/9449/financials.json Financial statements
GET /api/9449/financials-longterm.json Long-term results
GET /api/9449/segments.json Business segments
GET /api/9449/regions.json Sales by region
GET /api/9449/workforce.json Workforce