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.
-0.04%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with PANW at -1.97%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
6.34%
D&A growth well above PANW's 6.61%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-417.65%
Negative yoy deferred tax while PANW stands at 3.13%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-2.62%
Negative yoy SBC while PANW is 3.32%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
139.11%
Slight usage while PANW is negative at -103.97%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
107.24%
AR growth while PANW is negative at -693.90%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-141.75%
Negative yoy inventory while PANW is 23.86%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
2424.24%
AP growth well above PANW's 557.63%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
151.29%
Some yoy usage while PANW is negative at -23.99%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
0.85%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. PANW's 5.48%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
77.21%
Some CFO growth while PANW is negative at -23.79%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-21.92%
Negative yoy CapEx while PANW is 16.20%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-1710.12%
Negative yoy acquisition while PANW stands at 63.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-21.75%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -34.94%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
18.13%
Proceeds from sales/maturities above 1.5x PANW's 3.51%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is capitalizing on strong valuations or freeing liquidity for expansions.
22.32%
We have some outflow growth while PANW is negative at -163.84%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
-480.23%
We reduce yoy invests while PANW stands at 45.99%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
84.62%
Debt repayment growth of 84.62% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
31.13%
Issuance growth of 31.13% 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.
-6.04%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -6040.35%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.