PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
229.02 - 234.51
169.21 - 260.10
55.82M / 54.92M (Avg.)
32.24 | 7.26
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.
-21.31%
Negative net income growth while SONO stands at 95.18%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
24.41%
D&A growth well above SONO's 4.69%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
395.91%
Deferred tax of 395.91% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-7.66%
Both cut yoy SBC, with SONO at -3.73%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-123.51%
Negative yoy working capital usage while SONO is 75.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-90.78%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SONO at -216.57%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
413.27%
Inventory growth well above SONO's 311.49%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
115.00%
AP growth of 115.00% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
-2.08%
Negative yoy usage while SONO is 106.61%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-21.45%
Negative yoy CFO while SONO is 162.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
15.63%
CapEx growth well above SONO's 14.40%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
-25.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
5.48%
Some yoy expansion while SONO is negative at -14.44%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
28.52%
Proceeds from sales/maturities above 1.5x SONO's 17.04%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is capitalizing on strong valuations or freeing liquidity for expansions.
100.00%
Growth of 100.00% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
48.94%
Investing outflow well above SONO's 10.51%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-27.18%
We cut debt repayment yoy while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
-93.45%
Both yoy lines negative, with SONO at -150.00%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment or preference for internal financing over new equity in the niche.
-43.47%
We cut yoy buybacks while SONO is 88.91%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.