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
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
5.09%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of TWLO's 9.73%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
4.56%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of TWLO's 6.89%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
-37.09%
Negative EBIT growth while TWLO is at 52.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-37.09%
Negative operating income growth while TWLO is at 52.08%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-35.05%
Negative net income growth while TWLO stands at 50.03%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-35.90%
Negative EPS growth while TWLO is at 51.13%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-35.90%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TWLO is at 51.13%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.16%
Share reduction more than 1.5x TWLO's 2.55%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.21%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x TWLO's 2.55%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-22.47%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-35.06%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
502.41%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while TWLO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
100.71%
Positive 5Y CAGR while TWLO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
58.97%
Positive 3Y CAGR while TWLO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
439.77%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x TWLO's 76.25%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
64.10%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of TWLO's 76.25%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
28.29%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of TWLO's 76.25%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
241.60%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x TWLO's 79.20% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
19.26%
Below 50% of TWLO's 79.20%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
2.55%
Below 50% of TWLO's 79.20%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
576.41%
Equity/share CAGR of 576.41% while TWLO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
115.95%
Equity/share CAGR of 115.95% while TWLO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
51.02%
Equity/share CAGR of 51.02% while TWLO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
14.71%
AR growth well above TWLO's 24.57%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
42.14%
We show growth while TWLO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
3.39%
Asset growth above 1.5x TWLO's 1.90%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
2.14%
50-75% of TWLO's 3.36%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
0.46%
Debt growth of 0.46% while TWLO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
5.83%
R&D dropping or stable vs. TWLO's 12.04%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.42%
We expand SG&A while TWLO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.