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.
65.06%
Net income growth at 50-75% of SONO's 95.18%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging competitiveness unless expansions are planned.
-5.29%
Negative yoy D&A while SONO is 4.69%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
210.71%
Deferred tax of 210.71% 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.
17.81%
SBC growth while SONO is negative at -3.73%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
1474.69%
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.
160.13%
AR growth while SONO is negative at -216.57%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
66.78%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. SONO's 311.49%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
-109.83%
Negative yoy AP while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-1550.00%
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.
103.81%
Operating cash flow growth at 50-75% of SONO's 162.75%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging operational liquidity vs. competitor.
-9.51%
Negative yoy CapEx while SONO is 14.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
23.89%
Acquisition growth of 23.89% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-66.08%
Both yoy lines negative, with SONO at -14.44%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
1.09%
Below 50% of SONO's 17.04%. Michael Burry would see minimal near-term inflows vs. competitor’s liquidation approach.
-7.50%
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.
-1387.27%
We reduce yoy invests while SONO stands at 10.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
100.00%
Debt repayment growth of 100.00% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-99.54%
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.
48.22%
Buyback growth at 50-75% of SONO's 88.91%. Martin Whitman questions partial disadvantage in per-share enhancements if competitor repurchases more.