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.
3.99%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of TWLO's 7.28%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
5.93%
Gross profit growth similar to TWLO's 5.43%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
-0.03%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-0.03%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-28.94%
Negative net income growth while TWLO stands at 5.23%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-29.17%
Negative EPS growth while TWLO is at 11.11%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-28.17%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TWLO is at 11.11%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.17%
Share reduction while TWLO is at 5.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.25%
Reduced diluted shares while TWLO is at 5.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
22.48%
OCF growth under 50% of TWLO's 436.66%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
34.35%
FCF growth under 50% of TWLO's 89.68%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
522.31%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x TWLO's 54.92%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
139.50%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x TWLO's 54.92%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
79.01%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of TWLO's 153.69%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
418.27%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x TWLO's 227.97%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
152.12%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of TWLO's 227.97%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
55.89%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of TWLO's 1503.98%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
293.93%
Positive 10Y CAGR while TWLO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
152.15%
Positive 5Y CAGR while TWLO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
38.59%
Positive short-term CAGR while TWLO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
428.15%
Equity/share CAGR of 428.15% while TWLO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
92.80%
Equity/share CAGR of 92.80% while TWLO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
44.27%
Below 50% of TWLO's 897.07%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-1.11%
Firm’s AR is declining while TWLO shows 3.48%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
45.33%
Inventory growth of 45.33% while TWLO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
2.31%
Asset growth above 1.5x TWLO's 0.02%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
1.62%
Positive BV/share change while TWLO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
4.45%
We have some new debt while TWLO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
5.49%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. TWLO's 5.77%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
15.11%
SG&A growth well above TWLO's 2.33%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.