PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
238.00 - 242.07
140.53 - 242.25
26.77M / 38.44M (Avg.)
25.64 | 9.39
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.
-4.57%
Negative net income growth while META stands at 10.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
16.37%
D&A growth well above META's 11.33%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-77.10%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
-2.85%
Negative yoy SBC while META is 16.57%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-406.40%
Both reduce yoy usage, with META at -271.20%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
67.39%
AR growth while META is negative at -147.72%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
78.84%
Inventory growth of 78.84% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-127.05%
Negative yoy AP while META is 144.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-78.96%
Negative yoy usage while META is 93.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
75.38%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. META's 175.76%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
-0.75%
Negative yoy CFO while META is 6.39%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
17.12%
Some CapEx rise while META is negative at -27.80%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
94.01%
Acquisition growth of 94.01% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
25.12%
Some yoy expansion while META is negative at -95.19%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
-62.13%
We reduce yoy sales while META is 198.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
31.87%
We have mild expansions while META is negative at -29.73%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.