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.
0.04%
Some net income increase while SONO is negative at -8.90%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
-1.22%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with SONO at -8.89%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
375.83%
Some yoy growth while SONO is negative at -1186.96%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
0.06%
Less SBC growth vs. SONO's 12.29%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
78.52%
Less working capital growth vs. SONO's 216.47%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-140.52%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SONO at -110.48%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-194.77%
Negative yoy inventory while SONO is 2229.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
121.99%
AP growth well above SONO's 120.70%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
78.99%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. SONO's 2271.51%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
241.03%
Well above SONO's 375.12%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
22.24%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of SONO's 157.24%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
15.54%
Lower CapEx growth vs. SONO's 58.48%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
-92.61%
Negative yoy acquisition while SONO stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-3.59%
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.
-32.99%
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.
26.30%
Growth of 26.30% while SONO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-157.31%
We reduce yoy invests while SONO stands at 61.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
75.39%
We repay more while SONO is negative at -0.06%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
-100.00%
Negative yoy issuance while SONO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
14.44%
Buyback growth below 50% of SONO's 93.87%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.