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.
-21.13%
Negative net income growth while PANW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
8.60%
D&A growth of 8.60% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
49.57%
Deferred tax of 49.57% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-2.17%
Negative yoy SBC while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
197.37%
Working capital change of 197.37% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
192.69%
AR growth of 192.69% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
-144.74%
Negative yoy inventory while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-123.61%
Negative yoy AP while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
80.11%
Growth of 80.11% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a difference in minor WC usage that might affect short-term cash flow if large.
22.96%
Growth of 22.96% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might reflect intangible expansions or partial write-offs.
107.17%
CFO growth of 107.17% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a modest edge that could widen if cost discipline remains strong.
-34.01%
Negative yoy CapEx while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-107.25%
Negative yoy acquisition while PANW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-144.13%
Negative yoy purchasing while PANW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
64.22%
Liquidation growth of 64.22% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-92.84%
We reduce yoy other investing while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-354.71%
We reduce yoy invests while PANW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
81.40%
Debt repayment growth of 81.40% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
112.88%
Issuance growth of 112.88% 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.
83.21%
Buyback growth of 83.21% 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.