PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
226.29 - 230.79
161.38 - 242.52
38.50M / 42.21M (Avg.)
34.73 | 6.57
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.
62.50%
Net income growth of 62.50% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a modest advantage that can compound if well-managed.
-2.82%
Negative yoy D&A while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
103.59%
Deferred tax of 103.59% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-103.59%
Negative yoy SBC while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
536.90%
Working capital change of 536.90% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
-222.72%
AR is negative yoy while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-246.34%
Negative yoy inventory while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
280.20%
AP growth of 280.20% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
210.65%
Growth of 210.65% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a difference in minor WC usage that might affect short-term cash flow if large.
-138.77%
Both negative yoy, with BABA at -97.84%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
721.82%
Some CFO growth while BABA is negative at -61.19%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-52.59%
Negative yoy CapEx while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-27170.05%
Negative yoy acquisition while BABA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
90.60%
Purchases growth of 90.60% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-76.27%
We reduce yoy sales while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
27170.05%
Growth well above BABA's 141.82%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
111.79%
Investing outflow well above BABA's 64.37%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-20.22%
We cut debt repayment yoy while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
-85.91%
Negative yoy issuance while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.