Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL)

Negative net income growth while META stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.

D&A growth of 5.25% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.

Deferred tax of 2164.29% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.

SBC growth of 9.09% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see some additional share issuance that must be justified by expansions or retention needs.

Negative yoy working capital usage while META is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.

AR growth of 126.89% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.

Negative yoy inventory while META is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.

AP growth of 164.29% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.

Negative yoy usage while META is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.

Growth of 121.43% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might reflect intangible expansions or partial write-offs.

Negative yoy CFO while META is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.

CapEx growth of 65.03% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost burden that must yield returns in future revenue or margins.

Acquisition growth of 28.85% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.

Negative yoy purchasing while META stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.

We reduce yoy sales while META is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.

Growth of 38.80% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.

We reduce yoy invests while META stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.

We cut debt repayment yoy while META is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.

We cut yoy buybacks while META is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.