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.
14.07%
Some net income increase while SE is negative at -24.90%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
16.79%
Some D&A expansion while SE is negative at -58.41%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-654.58%
Negative yoy deferred tax while SE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
11.98%
SBC growth while SE is negative at -52.22%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
762.03%
Well above SE's 533.89% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-126.19%
AR is negative yoy while SE is 50.10%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
108.44%
Inventory growth well above SE's 97.19%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
262.19%
AP growth of 262.19% 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.
3315.52%
Growth well above SE's 127.19%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-84.35%
Both negative yoy, with SE at -83.22%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
154.35%
Some CFO growth while SE is negative at -37.35%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-34.00%
Negative yoy CapEx while SE is 42.19%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
78.10%
Acquisition spending well above SE's 98.69%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier integration risk or short-term free cash flow drain vs. competitor.
-19.08%
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.
32.00%
Liquidation growth of 32.00% while SE is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
29.80%
Growth well above SE's 37.78%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-7.32%
Both yoy lines negative, with SE at -75.43%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
11.72%
Debt repayment growth of 11.72% while SE 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.