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.
4.19%
Net income growth under 50% of SONO's 95.18%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
1.13%
Less D&A growth vs. SONO's 4.69%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-252.82%
Negative yoy deferred tax while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
6.89%
SBC growth while SONO is negative at -3.73%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
57.02%
Well above SONO's 75.63% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-1311.03%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SONO at -216.57%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-186.72%
Negative yoy inventory while SONO is 311.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
300.14%
AP growth of 300.14% 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.
-95.74%
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.
-10.09%
Negative yoy CFO while SONO is 162.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-75.11%
Negative yoy CapEx while SONO is 14.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
1.74%
Acquisition growth of 1.74% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
35.83%
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.
-12.09%
We reduce yoy sales while SONO is 17.04%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-447.83%
We reduce yoy other investing while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
87.94%
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.
41.86%
Debt repayment growth of 41.86% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
1360.00%
We slightly raise equity while SONO is negative at -150.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
-32.53%
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.