PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
33.44 - 34.57
31.40 - 61.90
7.61M / 5.87M (Avg.)
-152.73 | -0.22
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
9.88%
Revenue growth above 1.5x CFLT's 6.50%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
10.20%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x CFLT's 8.70%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
5.49%
EBIT growth below 50% of CFLT's 22.05%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
5.49%
Operating income growth under 50% of CFLT's 22.05%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
8.47%
Positive net income growth while CFLT is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
9.09%
EPS growth of 9.09% while CFLT is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
9.09%
Diluted EPS growth of 9.09% while CFLT is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
0.96%
Share count expansion well above CFLT's 1.71%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.96%
Diluted share count expanding well above CFLT's 1.71%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
66.07%
OCF growth under 50% of CFLT's 317.59%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
55.27%
FCF growth under 50% of CFLT's 209.29%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
9.68%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CFLT's 119.94%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
9.68%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CFLT's 119.94%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
9.68%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CFLT's 119.94%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
94.18%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of CFLT's 170.13%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
94.18%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of CFLT's 170.13%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
94.18%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of CFLT's 170.13%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
33.88%
Positive 10Y CAGR while CFLT is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
33.88%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CFLT is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
33.88%
Positive short-term CAGR while CFLT is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
178.58%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of CFLT's 291.99%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
178.58%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of CFLT's 291.99%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
178.58%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of CFLT's 291.99%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
35.32%
AR growth well above CFLT's 25.52%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-8.83%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
4.32%
Similar asset growth to CFLT's 4.20%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
-1.13%
We have a declining book value while CFLT shows 0.98%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
466.43%
We have some new debt while CFLT reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
9.27%
We increase R&D while CFLT cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.22%
We expand SG&A while CFLT cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.