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.
11.94%
Some net income increase while CRWV is negative at -512.48%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
15.72%
D&A growth well above CRWV's 21.37%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-25.15%
Negative yoy deferred tax while CRWV stands at 37.14%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
5.04%
Less SBC growth vs. CRWV's 2193.64%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
-88.08%
Both reduce yoy usage, with CRWV at -71.89%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
205.97%
AR growth while CRWV is negative at -1313.73%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-778.18%
Negative yoy inventory while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-121.79%
Negative yoy AP while CRWV is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-173.54%
Negative yoy usage while CRWV is 185.39%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-100.51%
Negative yoy while CRWV is 59.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-8.11%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with CRWV at -67.24%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
-7.57%
Negative yoy CapEx while CRWV is 59.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-37.78%
Negative yoy acquisition while CRWV stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
42.78%
Purchases growth of 42.78% while CRWV is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
14.64%
We have some liquidation growth while CRWV is negative at -68.07%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
-139.01%
We reduce yoy other investing while CRWV is 5.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-2.38%
We reduce yoy invests while CRWV stands at 58.63%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
52.09%
We repay more while CRWV is negative at -85.19%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
32.21%
Issuance growth of 32.21% 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.
2.45%
Buyback growth below 50% of CRWV's 100.00%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.