205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.59M (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.
8.16%
Net income growth at 75-90% of QCOM's 10.81%. Bill Ackman would call for strategic or operational tweaks to match competitor’s earnings growth.
-4.22%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with QCOM at -5.62%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
66.40%
Lower deferred tax growth vs. QCOM's 176.60%, implying fewer future tax liabilities. David Dodd would confirm there’s no short-term tax shock instead.
-14.29%
Both cut yoy SBC, with QCOM at -9.75%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
1.48%
Less working capital growth vs. QCOM's 33.64%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
269.39%
AR growth while QCOM is negative at -26.05%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-73.53%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with QCOM at -342.22%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
555.56%
AP growth well above QCOM's 120.63%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-89.35%
Negative yoy usage while QCOM is 224.32%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-2485.71%
Negative yoy while QCOM is 28.95%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-1.84%
Negative yoy CFO while QCOM is 13.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
20.86%
Some CapEx rise while QCOM is negative at -10.29%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-20.86%
Both yoy lines negative, with QCOM at -272.50%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
-36.20%
Negative yoy purchasing while QCOM stands at 2.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
48.54%
We have some liquidation growth while QCOM is negative at -9.67%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
15.71%
We have some outflow growth while QCOM is negative at -74.47%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
-13.60%
Both yoy lines negative, with QCOM at -58.56%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-107.79%
Negative yoy issuance while QCOM is 62.91%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
5.00%
We have some buyback growth while QCOM is negative at -125.00%. John Neff sees a short-term advantage in boosting EPS unless expansions hamper competitor.