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.
-7.99%
Negative net income growth while META stands at 27.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-5.44%
Negative yoy D&A while META is 19.13%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-322.22%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
4.60%
SBC growth well above META's 6.70%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
-1.90%
Both reduce yoy usage, with META at -111.46%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
-165.98%
AR is negative yoy while META is 28.45%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
800.00%
Some inventory rise while META is negative at -91.58%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
324.53%
A yoy AP increase while META is negative at -2000.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-41.72%
Both reduce yoy usage, with META at -90.89%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
97.63%
Some yoy increase while META is negative at -4.69%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
8.03%
Some CFO growth while META is negative at -28.14%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-42.09%
Both yoy lines negative, with META at -5.97%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-88.70%
Negative yoy acquisition while META stands at 86.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
38.87%
Purchases well above META's 53.71%. Michael Burry would see major cash outflow into securities vs. competitor’s approach, risking near-term FCF.
-35.39%
We reduce yoy sales while META is 4.93%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-235.32%
We reduce yoy other investing while META is 51800.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-52.98%
We reduce yoy invests while META stands at 247.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
6.22%
We repay more while META is negative at -1648.35%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.