PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
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.
200.23%
Net income growth above 1.5x MCHP's 14.30%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
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.
244.49%
Less working capital growth vs. MCHP's 725.33%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-3480.00%
AR is negative yoy while MCHP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
98.50%
Some inventory rise while MCHP is negative at -114.85%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
716.67%
Growth well above MCHP's 889.89%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-526.36%
Negative yoy while MCHP is 724.70%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
59.20%
Operating cash flow growth similar to MCHP's 54.65%. Walter Schloss would see parallel improvements or market conditions in cash generation.
13.73%
Some CapEx rise while MCHP is negative at -122.26%. 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.
-70.77%
Negative yoy purchasing while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
75.53%
Liquidation growth of 75.53% while MCHP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
91.89%
We have mild expansions while MCHP is negative at -122.26%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-17.02%
Both yoy lines negative, with MCHP at -31.11%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment or preference for internal financing over new equity in the niche.
50.00%
Buyback growth of 50.00% while MCHP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.