PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
503.87 - 512.55
344.79 - 555.45
23.62M / 20.39M (Avg.)
37.30 | 13.67
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.
-21.13%
Negative net income growth while AI stands at 0.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
8.60%
Some D&A expansion while AI is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
49.57%
Deferred tax of 49.57% while AI is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-2.17%
Both cut yoy SBC, with AI at -9.64%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
197.37%
Less working capital growth vs. AI's 615.91%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
192.69%
AR growth of 192.69% while AI is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
-144.74%
Negative yoy inventory while AI is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-123.61%
Negative yoy AP while AI is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
80.11%
Growth well above AI's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
22.96%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. AI's 100.00%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
107.17%
Operating cash flow growth at 50-75% of AI's 151.15%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging operational liquidity vs. competitor.
-34.01%
Both yoy lines negative, with AI at -159.12%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-107.25%
Negative yoy acquisition while AI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-144.13%
Negative yoy purchasing while AI stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
64.22%
We have some liquidation growth while AI is negative at -100.00%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
-92.84%
We reduce yoy other investing while AI is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-354.71%
We reduce yoy invests while AI stands at 85.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
81.40%
Debt repayment growth of 81.40% while AI is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
112.88%
Issuance growth of 112.88% while AI is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild dilution that must be justified by expansions or acquisitions vs. competitor’s stable share base.
83.21%
Buyback growth of 83.21% while AI is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.