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.
135.40%
Net income growth of 135.40% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a modest advantage that can compound if well-managed.
19.49%
D&A growth of 19.49% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-311.11%
Negative yoy deferred tax while BABA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
8.29%
SBC growth of 8.29% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see some additional share issuance that must be justified by expansions or retention needs.
571.02%
Working capital change of 571.02% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
-146.15%
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.
-50.54%
Negative yoy inventory while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
302.78%
AP growth of 302.78% 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.
244.54%
Growth of 244.54% 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.
-164.23%
Both negative yoy, with BABA at -97.84%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
438.81%
Some CFO growth while BABA is negative at -61.19%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-182.82%
Negative yoy CapEx while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
5.41%
Acquisition growth of 5.41% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-326.82%
Negative yoy purchasing while BABA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-31.81%
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.
-404.32%
We reduce yoy other investing while BABA is 141.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-735.23%
We reduce yoy invests while BABA stands at 64.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-8.33%
We cut debt repayment yoy while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.