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.
-16.88%
Negative net income growth while AI stands at 0.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
11.89%
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.
-278.06%
Negative yoy deferred tax while AI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-1.19%
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.
1.12%
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.
-365.56%
AR is negative yoy while AI is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-20.33%
Negative yoy inventory while AI is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
86.82%
AP growth of 86.82% while AI is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
62.24%
Growth well above AI's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-5.50%
Negative yoy while AI is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-18.36%
Negative yoy CFO while AI is 151.15%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-15.03%
Both yoy lines negative, with AI at -159.12%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
88.73%
Acquisition growth of 88.73% while AI is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-10.08%
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.
-7.95%
Both yoy lines are negative, with AI at -100.00%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-18.18%
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.
-83.71%
We reduce yoy invests while AI stands at 85.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
97.22%
Debt repayment growth of 97.22% while AI is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
8.81%
Issuance growth of 8.81% 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.
4.67%
Buyback growth of 4.67% 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.