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.
7.12%
Net income growth similar to CRWV's 7.67%. Walter Schloss would find parallel expansions or market conditions in both firms’ profitability.
28.02%
D&A growth well above CRWV's 26.15%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-93.78%
Negative yoy deferred tax while CRWV stands at 3.70%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-3.53%
Both cut yoy SBC, with CRWV at -21.18%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
117.68%
Slight usage while CRWV is negative at -110.52%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
58.83%
AR growth while CRWV is negative at -35.57%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-92.69%
Negative yoy inventory while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
23.07%
A yoy AP increase while CRWV is negative at -663.96%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
145.18%
Growth well above CRWV's 112.72%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-130.53%
Negative yoy while CRWV is 23.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
66.18%
Some CFO growth while CRWV is negative at -510.76%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-5.95%
Both yoy lines negative, with CRWV at -74.30%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
30.18%
Acquisition growth of 30.18% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-118.24%
Negative yoy purchasing while CRWV stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
72.03%
We have some liquidation growth while CRWV is negative at -100.00%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
3875.00%
Growth well above CRWV's 202.79%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
9.91%
We have mild expansions while CRWV is negative at -70.42%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
113.28%
Stock issuance far above CRWV's 4.88%. Michael Burry flags a significant dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach unless ROI is very high.
4.11%
Buyback growth of 4.11% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.