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.
8.62%
Net income growth at 50-75% of WLDS's 12.85%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging competitiveness unless expansions are planned.
12.20%
Some D&A expansion while WLDS is negative at -1.85%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-161.90%
Negative yoy deferred tax while WLDS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
70.00%
SBC growth while WLDS is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
172.97%
Slight usage while WLDS is negative at -210.16%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
365.22%
AR growth well above WLDS's 393.62%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-262.50%
Negative yoy inventory while WLDS is 55.38%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-775.00%
Negative yoy AP while WLDS is 92.80%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
234.48%
Some yoy usage while WLDS is negative at -148.32%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-95.62%
Negative yoy while WLDS is 263.93%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-11.94%
Negative yoy CFO while WLDS is 2.82%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-46.51%
Negative yoy CapEx while WLDS is 80.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
20.30%
Purchases growth of 20.30% while WLDS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
29.90%
We have some liquidation growth while WLDS is negative at -119.06%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
68.75%
Growth of 68.75% while WLDS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
133.55%
We have mild expansions while WLDS is negative at -119.41%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-58.55%
Negative yoy issuance while WLDS is 2021.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.