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.
0.44%
Net income growth of 0.44% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a modest advantage that can compound if well-managed.
5.86%
D&A growth of 5.86% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
13.45%
Deferred tax of 13.45% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-0.26%
Negative yoy SBC while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
184.85%
Working capital change of 184.85% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
-553.16%
AR is negative yoy while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-78.85%
Negative yoy inventory while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
548.77%
AP growth of 548.77% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
344.01%
Growth of 344.01% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a difference in minor WC usage that might affect short-term cash flow if large.
53.75%
Growth of 53.75% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might reflect intangible expansions or partial write-offs.
16.54%
CFO growth of 16.54% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a modest edge that could widen if cost discipline remains strong.
-26.67%
Negative yoy CapEx while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
14.79%
Acquisition growth of 14.79% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-29.68%
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.
-32.34%
We reduce yoy sales while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
70.18%
Growth of 70.18% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-38.77%
We reduce yoy invests while CRWV stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-54.86%
We cut debt repayment yoy while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
2.30%
Issuance growth of 2.30% while CRWV 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.
0.07%
Buyback growth of 0.07% 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.