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.
-5.49%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with WLDS at -208.44%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
5.54%
Less D&A growth vs. WLDS's 75.00%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-661.70%
Negative yoy deferred tax while WLDS stands at 50.77%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-0.77%
Negative yoy SBC while WLDS is 282.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
61.89%
Well above WLDS's 91.94% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-954.41%
AR is negative yoy while WLDS is 187.16%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-11092.31%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with WLDS at -20.00%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
6588.15%
AP growth well above WLDS's 22.22%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-164.58%
Both reduce yoy usage, with WLDS at -119.25%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
352.09%
Some yoy increase while WLDS is negative at -56.02%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-4.24%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with WLDS at -228.31%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
-53.99%
Both yoy lines negative, with WLDS at -57.14%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-400.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while WLDS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
20.33%
Purchases growth of 20.33% while WLDS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-20.22%
We reduce yoy sales while WLDS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-76.62%
Both yoy lines negative, with WLDS at -57.14%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-74.00%
We cut debt repayment yoy while WLDS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
13.76%
Buyback growth of 13.76% while WLDS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.