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.
-4.70%
Negative net income growth while MCHP stands at 2628.28%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-1.96%
Negative yoy D&A while MCHP is 25.00%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
155.56%
Well above MCHP's 95.50% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
-5.33%
Both cut yoy SBC, with MCHP at -3.33%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
131.94%
Well above MCHP's 37.04% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
81.25%
AR growth is negative or stable vs. MCHP's 1862.75%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd would confirm it doesn't hamper sales volume.
70.00%
Inventory growth well above MCHP's 12.69%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
52.78%
AP growth well above MCHP's 4.83%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
261.70%
Some yoy usage while MCHP is negative at -1153.20%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
833.33%
Well above MCHP's 166.81%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
70.77%
Operating cash flow growth at 50-75% of MCHP's 103.64%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging operational liquidity vs. competitor.
-27.84%
Negative yoy CapEx while MCHP is 37.99%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
27.84%
Less M&A spending yoy vs. MCHP's 100.00%, reducing near-term risk. David Dodd would confirm the firm is not missing out on a strategic deal that competitor might exploit.
58.49%
Purchases well above MCHP's 51.49%. Michael Burry would see major cash outflow into securities vs. competitor’s approach, risking near-term FCF.
-69.92%
Both yoy lines are negative, with MCHP at -20.86%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-24.74%
We reduce yoy other investing while MCHP is 14.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-168.39%
We reduce yoy invests while MCHP stands at 94.99%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
100.00%
Debt repayment growth of 100.00% while MCHP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
1.75%
We slightly raise equity while MCHP is negative at -44.52%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
-1.80%
We cut yoy buybacks while MCHP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.