PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.43 - 1.45
1.18 - 2.36
880.0K / 1.73M (Avg.)
-18.00 | -0.08
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
28.96%
Net income growth under 50% of 1177.HK's 243.19%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
4.35%
D&A growth of 4.35% while 1177.HK is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-709.22%
Negative yoy deferred tax while 1177.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-49.70%
Negative yoy SBC while 1177.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-361.13%
Negative yoy working capital usage while 1177.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
100.00%
AR growth of 100.00% while 1177.HK is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
100.00%
Inventory growth of 100.00% while 1177.HK is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-100.00%
Negative yoy AP while 1177.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
11.44%
Growth of 11.44% while 1177.HK is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a difference in minor WC usage that might affect short-term cash flow if large.
-23.25%
Both negative yoy, with 1177.HK at -243.19%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-80.68%
Negative yoy CFO while 1177.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-77.52%
Negative yoy CapEx while 1177.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
2232.14%
Acquisition growth of 2232.14% while 1177.HK is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-162.42%
Negative yoy purchasing while 1177.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-92.51%
We reduce yoy sales while 1177.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
152.74%
Growth of 152.74% while 1177.HK is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-654.10%
We reduce yoy invests while 1177.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2497.75%
Issuance growth of 2497.75% while 1177.HK is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild dilution that must be justified by expansions or acquisitions vs. competitor’s stable share base.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.