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.
22.98%
Some net income increase while PANW is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
-4.60%
Negative yoy D&A while PANW is 0.57%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-62.95%
Negative yoy deferred tax while PANW stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
133.73%
SBC growth while PANW is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
98.38%
Well above PANW's 100.00% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
779.62%
AR growth well above PANW's 100.00%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.15%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. PANW's 100.00%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
-110.50%
Both negative yoy, with PANW at -110.23%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
23.77%
Some CFO growth while PANW is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
44.83%
Lower CapEx growth vs. PANW's 100.00%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
-6.33%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -100.00%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
-134.84%
Negative yoy purchasing while PANW stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
129.99%
We have some liquidation growth while PANW is negative at -100.00%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
-70.34%
We reduce yoy other investing while PANW is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
72.80%
Investing outflow well above PANW's 100.00%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
100.00%
Debt repayment similar to PANW's 100.00%. Walter Schloss sees parallel liability management or similar free cash flow availability.
120.17%
Issuance growth of 120.17% while PANW 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.
-92.99%
We cut yoy buybacks while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.