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.
148.97%
Net income growth above 1.5x SE's 69.84%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
10.59%
D&A growth of 10.59% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
168.52%
Deferred tax of 168.52% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
8.22%
SBC growth of 8.22% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see some additional share issuance that must be justified by expansions or retention needs.
254.65%
Working capital change of 254.65% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
-204.97%
AR is negative yoy while SE is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-34.79%
Negative yoy inventory while SE is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
193.10%
AP growth of 193.10% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
163.65%
Growth of 163.65% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a difference in minor WC usage that might affect short-term cash flow if large.
-49.80%
Both negative yoy, with SE at -87.60%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
280.24%
Some CFO growth while SE is negative at -25.86%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
16.98%
CapEx growth of 16.98% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost burden that must yield returns in future revenue or margins.
93.84%
Acquisition growth of 93.84% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-1004.08%
Negative yoy purchasing while SE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-75.33%
We reduce yoy sales while SE is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-198.07%
We reduce yoy other investing while SE is 36.70%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-160.57%
We reduce yoy invests while SE stands at 36.70%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-49.32%
We cut debt repayment yoy while SE 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.