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.
-12.23%
Negative net income growth while BABA stands at 37.91%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
4.95%
Less D&A growth vs. BABA's 51.26%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
145.78%
Deferred tax of 145.78% 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.
0.25%
SBC growth while BABA is negative at -6.67%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-236.55%
Negative yoy working capital usage while BABA is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
137.00%
AR growth of 137.00% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
198.45%
Inventory growth of 198.45% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-214.70%
Negative yoy AP while BABA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-160.04%
Negative yoy usage while BABA is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-350.98%
Negative yoy while BABA is 811.86%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-114.51%
Negative yoy CFO while BABA is 135.54%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
14.40%
Lower CapEx growth vs. BABA's 100.00%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
83.95%
Acquisition spending well above BABA's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier integration risk or short-term free cash flow drain vs. competitor.
81.04%
Purchases growth of 81.04% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-24.89%
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.
-36.36%
Both yoy lines negative, with BABA at -358.39%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
73.77%
We have mild expansions while BABA is negative at -358.39%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
15.47%
Debt repayment growth of 15.47% while BABA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.