PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
229.02 - 234.51
169.21 - 260.10
55.82M / 54.92M (Avg.)
32.24 | 7.26
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.
-42.73%
Negative net income growth while SONO stands at 95.18%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-16.15%
Negative yoy D&A while SONO is 4.69%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-5.78%
Negative yoy deferred tax while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-2.78%
Both cut yoy SBC, with SONO at -3.73%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-222.86%
Negative yoy working capital usage while SONO is 75.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-83.52%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SONO at -216.57%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
266.67%
Inventory growth well above SONO's 311.49%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
-901.88%
Negative yoy AP while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
955.17%
Growth well above SONO's 106.61%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
80.00%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. SONO's 1546.08%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
-57.76%
Negative yoy CFO while SONO is 162.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
35.12%
CapEx growth well above SONO's 14.40%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
37.21%
Acquisition growth of 37.21% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
19.92%
Some yoy expansion while SONO is negative at -14.44%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
-13.70%
We reduce yoy sales while SONO is 17.04%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
86.05%
Growth of 86.05% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
33.20%
Investing outflow well above SONO's 10.51%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
24500.00%
We slightly raise equity while SONO is negative at -150.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
2.86%
Buyback growth below 50% of SONO's 88.91%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.