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.
15.44%
Some net income increase while PANW is negative at -89.70%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
-6.61%
Negative yoy D&A while PANW is 15.13%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-96.52%
Negative yoy deferred tax while PANW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
3.05%
Less SBC growth vs. PANW's 41.48%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
129.00%
Well above PANW's 68.92% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-177.16%
AR is negative yoy while PANW is 300.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
196.85%
Inventory growth well above PANW's 299.65%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
139.82%
A yoy AP increase while PANW is negative at -358.29%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
1368.75%
Some yoy usage while PANW is negative at -34.80%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-406.38%
Negative yoy while PANW is 1160.89%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-30.98%
Negative yoy CFO while PANW is 31.66%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-14.22%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -58.53%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-885.94%
Negative yoy acquisition while PANW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
11.08%
Purchases growth of 11.08% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
34.12%
Liquidation growth of 34.12% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-342.42%
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.
-140.52%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -58.53%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
96.43%
Issuance growth of 96.43% 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.
46.12%
Buyback growth below 50% of PANW's 93.22%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.