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.
18.22%
Some net income increase while QRVO is negative at -18.40%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
1.03%
Some D&A expansion while QRVO is negative at -4.69%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative yoy SBC while QRVO is 54.93%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
70.93%
Slight usage while QRVO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-100.00%
AR is negative yoy while QRVO is 34.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-153.57%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with QRVO at -67.12%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
100.00%
AP growth of 100.00% while QRVO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
60.21%
Growth well above QRVO's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
686.67%
Some yoy increase while QRVO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
62.09%
Some CFO growth while QRVO is negative at -8.15%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
2.79%
Some CapEx rise while QRVO is negative at -31.67%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
100.00%
Acquisition spending well above QRVO's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier integration risk or short-term free cash flow drain vs. competitor.
-74.50%
Negative yoy purchasing while QRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
51.73%
Liquidation growth of 51.73% while QRVO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-200.00%
Both yoy lines negative, with QRVO at -97.66%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
-188.64%
Both yoy lines negative, with QRVO at -134.85%. 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.
142.86%
We slightly raise equity while QRVO is negative at -13.26%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
13.42%
Repurchase growth above 1.5x QRVO's 0.15%. David Dodd would see a strong per-share advantage if the share price is reasonably valued.