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.
-2.32%
Negative net income growth while PANW stands at 168.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
5.37%
D&A growth well above PANW's 8.70%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
23.31%
Some yoy growth while PANW is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
2.57%
Less SBC growth vs. PANW's 56.99%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
147.46%
Slight usage while PANW is negative at -1.68%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
196.87%
AR growth well above PANW's 29.77%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-203.63%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with PANW at -166.78%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
-250.85%
Negative yoy AP while PANW is 808.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
9.11%
Some yoy usage while PANW is negative at -8.91%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-138.78%
Negative yoy while PANW is 107.29%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
42.93%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of PANW's 103.06%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
32.09%
Some CapEx rise while PANW is negative at -30.22%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-43650.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while PANW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-36.36%
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.
14.57%
Liquidation growth of 14.57% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
93.79%
Growth of 93.79% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-143.68%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -30.22%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
100.00%
Debt repayment growth of 100.00% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
114.93%
Issuance growth of 114.93% 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.
-53.98%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -490.00%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.