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.
-19.46%
Negative net income growth while WLDS stands at 12.35%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-0.62%
Negative yoy D&A while WLDS is 91.67%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-7.54%
Both cut yoy SBC, with WLDS at -73.67%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
115.43%
Well above WLDS's 117.58% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
24.47%
AR growth while WLDS is negative at -261.11%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
58.99%
Some inventory rise while WLDS is negative at -400.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
-141.79%
Both negative yoy AP, with WLDS at -164.71%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-100.00%
Negative yoy usage while WLDS is 136.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-346.37%
Both negative yoy, with WLDS at -33.14%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-16.01%
Negative yoy CFO while WLDS is 13.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
23.00%
Some CapEx rise while WLDS is negative at -181.82%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-17.29%
Negative yoy purchasing while WLDS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
49.10%
Liquidation growth of 49.10% while WLDS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
24.82%
We have some outflow growth while WLDS is negative at -11316.67%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
260.48%
We have mild expansions while WLDS is negative at -4111.76%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-60.60%
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.
-0.61%
We cut yoy buybacks while WLDS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.