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.
15.93%
Net income growth under 50% of META's 36.09%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
8.68%
D&A growth well above META's 5.98%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-112.08%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
0.60%
Less SBC growth vs. META's 7.76%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
831.98%
Slight usage while META is negative at -177.88%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-202.08%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with META at -284.27%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
164.55%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. META's 909.76%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
117.84%
A yoy AP increase while META is negative at -2150.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
382.35%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. META's 930.23%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
-88.08%
Both negative yoy, with META at -53.85%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
19.09%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x META's 7.21%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
12.56%
CapEx growth well above META's 12.10%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
-11.76%
Both yoy lines negative, with META at -1800.00%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
-19.85%
Both yoy lines negative, with META at -108.22%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
15.98%
We have some liquidation growth while META is negative at -1.53%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
58.75%
Growth well above META's 24.24%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-14.86%
Both yoy lines negative, with META at -196.60%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-17266.67%
We cut debt repayment yoy while META is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
23.98%
Buyback growth of 23.98% while META is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.