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.
-13.12%
Negative net income growth while SONO stands at 38.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-3.52%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with SONO at -7.23%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
148.59%
Some yoy growth while SONO is negative at -365.12%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
-1.19%
Negative yoy SBC while SONO is 20.94%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
39.46%
Less working capital growth vs. SONO's 246.73%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-68.99%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SONO at -147.24%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
2045.71%
Some inventory rise while SONO is negative at -429.89%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
101.91%
AP growth well above SONO's 177.34%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-38.82%
Both reduce yoy usage, with SONO at -2.39%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
22.36%
Some yoy increase while SONO is negative at -124.36%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
4.31%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of SONO's 270.09%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
15.36%
Some CapEx rise while SONO is negative at -121.18%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-158.06%
Negative yoy acquisition while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-19.74%
Negative yoy purchasing while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
69.60%
Liquidation growth of 69.60% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-446.51%
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.
106.04%
We have mild expansions while SONO is negative at -121.18%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-20.00%
We cut debt repayment yoy while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
-99.74%
Negative yoy issuance while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
28.47%
Buyback growth at 50-75% of SONO's 53.00%. Martin Whitman questions partial disadvantage in per-share enhancements if competitor repurchases more.