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.
126.90%
Net income growth under 50% of SONO's 618.55%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
-1.33%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with SONO at -8.61%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
85.39%
Well above SONO's 103.07% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
17.17%
SBC growth while SONO is negative at -7.06%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
38.12%
Well above SONO's 66.42% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-719.06%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SONO at -1381.05%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-593.43%
Negative yoy inventory while SONO is 202.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
222.23%
A yoy AP increase while SONO is negative at -74.67%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
210.42%
Some yoy usage while SONO is negative at -72.71%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
933.33%
Some yoy increase while SONO is negative at -126.22%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
88.39%
Operating cash flow growth at 50-75% of SONO's 172.10%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging operational liquidity vs. competitor.
-96.19%
Both yoy lines negative, with SONO at -262.08%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
82.35%
Acquisition growth of 82.35% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-117.11%
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.
33.80%
Liquidation growth of 33.80% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
291.18%
We have some outflow growth while SONO is negative at -236.85%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
-255.20%
Both yoy lines negative, with SONO at -262.08%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
81.67%
Debt repayment at 75-90% of SONO's 100.00%. Bill Ackman urges more debt clearance to match competitor’s lower leverage.
-100.00%
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.
-44.15%
We cut yoy buybacks while SONO is 75.89%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.