PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
11.74%
Some net income increase while QRVO is negative at -192.10%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
4.29%
D&A growth well above QRVO's 7.30%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-5300.00%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
-37.84%
Both cut yoy SBC, with QRVO at -41.53%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
94.19%
Less working capital growth vs. QRVO's 1216.42%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
64.95%
AR growth well above QRVO's 112.94%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
55.17%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. QRVO's 258.63%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
750.00%
A yoy AP increase while QRVO is negative at -156.29%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
1.97%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. QRVO's 739.87%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
95.24%
Well above QRVO's 4.09%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
15.33%
Operating cash flow growth at 50-75% of QRVO's 22.84%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging operational liquidity vs. competitor.
-48.59%
Negative yoy CapEx while QRVO is 32.97%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
48.59%
Acquisition growth of 48.59% while QRVO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-155.48%
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.
24.73%
Liquidation growth of 24.73% while QRVO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-58.02%
We reduce yoy other investing while QRVO is 147.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-2082.72%
We reduce yoy invests while QRVO stands at 68.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
100.00%
Debt repayment growth of 100.00% while QRVO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-46.08%
Both yoy lines negative, with QRVO at -25.01%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment or preference for internal financing over new equity in the niche.
-17.88%
Both yoy lines negative, with QRVO at -40.37%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.