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 CRWV stands at 7.67%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
11.89%
Less D&A growth vs. CRWV's 26.15%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-278.06%
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.
-1.19%
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.
1.12%
Slight usage while CRWV is negative at -110.52%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-365.56%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with CRWV at -35.57%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-20.33%
Negative yoy inventory while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
86.82%
A yoy AP increase while CRWV is negative at -663.96%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
62.24%
Growth well above CRWV's 112.72%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-5.50%
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.
-18.36%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with CRWV at -510.76%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
-15.03%
Both yoy lines negative, with CRWV at -74.30%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
88.73%
Acquisition growth of 88.73% while CRWV 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 CRWV stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-7.95%
Both yoy lines are negative, with CRWV 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 CRWV is 202.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-83.71%
Both yoy lines negative, with CRWV at -70.42%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
97.22%
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.
8.81%
Stock issuance far above CRWV's 4.88%. Michael Burry flags a significant dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach unless ROI is very high.
4.67%
Buyback growth of 4.67% 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.