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.
-16.66%
Negative net income growth while SONO stands at 17.19%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-2.70%
Negative yoy D&A while SONO is 4.49%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
326.10%
Some yoy growth while SONO is negative at -135.80%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
0.22%
Less SBC growth vs. SONO's 8.44%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
10.60%
Less working capital growth vs. SONO's 131.66%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-97.44%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SONO at -158.53%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
152.24%
Some inventory rise while SONO is negative at -255.68%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
106.48%
AP growth well above SONO's 147.98%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-166.86%
Negative yoy usage while SONO is 92.11%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-85.00%
Negative yoy while SONO is 292.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-4.24%
Negative yoy CFO while SONO is 117.68%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
22.12%
Lower CapEx growth vs. SONO's 57.11%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
4.55%
Acquisition growth of 4.55% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-29.31%
Negative yoy purchasing while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-56.50%
We reduce yoy sales while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-385.33%
We reduce yoy other investing while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-86.25%
We reduce yoy invests while SONO stands at 57.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
8.67%
Buyback growth at 50-75% of SONO's 13.14%. Martin Whitman questions partial disadvantage in per-share enhancements if competitor repurchases more.