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.
9.72%
Some net income increase while MCHP is negative at -70.98%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-168.00%
Negative yoy deferred tax while MCHP stands at 49.24%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
53.66%
SBC growth well above MCHP's 4.63%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
-247.40%
Negative yoy working capital usage while MCHP is 36.06%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-190.30%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with MCHP at -213.77%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-105.13%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with MCHP at -606.90%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
303.45%
AP growth well above MCHP's 233.60%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-505.75%
Negative yoy usage while MCHP is 85.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-190.91%
Both negative yoy, with MCHP at -14.42%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-51.48%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with MCHP at -5.65%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
1.23%
Lower CapEx growth vs. MCHP's 40.40%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
-100.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while MCHP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
68.79%
Purchases growth of 68.79% while MCHP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
437.05%
We have some liquidation growth while MCHP is negative at -134.78%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
96.79%
Growth well above MCHP's 42.70%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
143.00%
Investing outflow well above MCHP's 39.68%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
0.13%
Debt repayment well below MCHP's 7.20%. Michael Burry suspects heavier leverage risk or insufficient cash generation to keep pace.
204.17%
We slightly raise equity while MCHP is negative at -53.50%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
-235.58%
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.