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.
12.27%
Some net income increase while PANW is negative at -120.91%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
-4.31%
Negative yoy D&A while PANW is 138.29%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
652.54%
Well above PANW's 120.91% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
0.55%
SBC growth while PANW is negative at -60.99%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-303.71%
Negative yoy working capital usage while PANW is 17.08%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-261.20%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PANW at -79.66%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-78.24%
Negative yoy inventory while PANW is 21.03%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
674.51%
A yoy AP increase while PANW is negative at -96.37%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-2062.86%
Negative yoy usage while PANW is 57.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
875.05%
Some yoy increase while PANW is negative at -156.74%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-31.48%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with PANW at -17.92%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
2.43%
Lower CapEx growth vs. PANW's 72.90%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
98.60%
Acquisition growth of 98.60% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
42.43%
Purchases growth of 42.43% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
12.70%
Liquidation growth of 12.70% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-3421.88%
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.
86.69%
Investing outflow well above PANW's 72.90%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-975.27%
We cut debt repayment yoy while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
-260.21%
Negative yoy issuance while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
-48.11%
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.