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.
17.37%
Net income growth above 1.5x CRWV's 7.67%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
-5.14%
Negative yoy D&A while CRWV is 26.15%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-115.33%
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.
6.49%
SBC growth while CRWV is negative at -21.18%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
143.11%
Slight usage while CRWV is negative at -110.52%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
250.99%
AR growth while CRWV is negative at -35.57%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-107.01%
Negative yoy usage while CRWV is 112.72%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-81.69%
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.
59.00%
Some CFO growth while CRWV is negative at -510.76%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
49.83%
Some CapEx rise while CRWV is negative at -74.30%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
4.88%
Acquisition growth of 4.88% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
26.36%
Purchases growth of 26.36% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
18.71%
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.
100.00%
Less 'other investing' outflow yoy vs. CRWV's 202.79%. David Dodd would see a stronger short-term cash position unless competitor invests more wisely.
84.74%
We have mild expansions while CRWV is negative at -70.42%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
78.06%
We repay more while CRWV is negative at -200.00%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
73.43%
Stock issuance far above CRWV's 4.88%. Michael Burry flags a significant dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach unless ROI is very high.
-6900.00%
We cut yoy buybacks while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.