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.
0.97%
Some net income increase while PANW is negative at -67.54%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
6.66%
Less D&A growth vs. PANW's 27.54%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
97.28%
Some yoy growth while PANW is negative at -97.67%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
6.57%
SBC growth well above PANW's 6.80%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
-85.12%
Negative yoy working capital usage while PANW is 46.11%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
215.62%
AR growth well above PANW's 219.56%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-414.07%
Negative yoy inventory while PANW is 258.74%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-147.88%
Negative yoy AP while PANW is 35.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-113.57%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PANW at -76.33%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
96.88%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. PANW's 250.00%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
13.04%
Operating cash flow growth similar to PANW's 14.45%. Walter Schloss would see parallel improvements or market conditions in cash generation.
6.61%
Lower CapEx growth vs. PANW's 34.55%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
50.00%
Less M&A spending yoy vs. PANW's 135.50%, reducing near-term risk. David Dodd would confirm the firm is not missing out on a strategic deal that competitor might exploit.
-13.54%
Negative yoy purchasing while PANW stands at 15.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
15.80%
We have some liquidation growth while PANW is negative at -19.52%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
202.91%
We have some outflow growth while PANW is negative at -135.50%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
6.31%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. PANW's 14.80%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
65.29%
Debt repayment growth of 65.29% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
38.91%
Issuance growth of 38.91% 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.
-45.61%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -15.70%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.