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.
-7.67%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with PANW at -9.34%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
13.25%
D&A growth well above PANW's 4.86%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-32.37%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
15.12%
SBC growth while PANW is negative at -8.07%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
44.37%
Well above PANW's 9.40% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
154.85%
AR growth well above PANW's 156.71%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-101.41%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with PANW at -95.74%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
-529.29%
Negative yoy AP while PANW is 262.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
22.45%
Some yoy usage while PANW is negative at -31.55%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-8.63%
Negative yoy while PANW is 1.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
69.39%
Some CFO growth while PANW is negative at -1.54%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
14.74%
Some CapEx rise while PANW is negative at -8.72%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
96.76%
Acquisition growth of 96.76% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
6.11%
Less growth in investment purchases vs. PANW's 40.72%, preserving near-term liquidity. David Dodd would confirm no strategic investment opportunities are lost.
-28.42%
Both yoy lines are negative, with PANW at -8.01%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-200.93%
We reduce yoy other investing while PANW is 29.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
58.03%
Investing outflow well above PANW's 3.64%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
94.88%
Debt repayment growth of 94.88% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
36.64%
Issuance growth of 36.64% 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.
42.71%
We have some buyback growth while PANW is negative at -4.08%. John Neff sees a short-term advantage in boosting EPS unless expansions hamper competitor.