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.
-39.87%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with PANW at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
12.85%
D&A growth well above PANW's 0.57%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-143.82%
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.
-0.82%
Both cut yoy SBC, with PANW at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
402.45%
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.
169.81%
AR growth well above PANW's 100.00%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-100.00%
Negative yoy inventory while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-100.00%
Negative yoy AP while PANW is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-30.43%
Negative yoy usage while PANW is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
83.77%
Some yoy increase while PANW is negative at -110.23%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
48.78%
Some CFO growth while PANW is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-8.51%
Negative yoy CapEx while PANW is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-126.98%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -100.00%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
-161.65%
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.
11.55%
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.
100.00%
Growth well above PANW's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-6317.39%
We reduce yoy invests while PANW stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
18.80%
Debt repayment well below PANW's 100.00%. Michael Burry suspects heavier leverage risk or insufficient cash generation to keep pace.
339.58%
Issuance growth of 339.58% 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.
47.69%
Buyback growth of 47.69% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.