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.
17.35%
Net income growth above 1.5x META's 10.17%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
11.40%
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.
-151.85%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
4.21%
Less SBC growth vs. META's 16.57%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
3166.67%
Slight usage while META is negative at -271.20%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-159.85%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with META at -147.72%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
96.56%
Inventory growth of 96.56% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-136.52%
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.
474.80%
Growth well above META's 93.48%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-166.67%
Negative yoy while META is 175.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
22.18%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x META's 6.39%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-236.20%
Both yoy lines negative, with META at -27.80%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
52.83%
Acquisition growth of 52.83% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
50.67%
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.
-29.61%
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.
-5455.56%
Both yoy lines negative, with META at -645.56%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
37.33%
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.
200.00%
Repurchase growth above 1.5x META's 20.28%. David Dodd would see a strong per-share advantage if the share price is reasonably valued.