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.
0.44%
Net income growth under 50% of PANW's 28.30%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
5.86%
D&A growth well above PANW's 2.42%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
13.45%
Some yoy growth while PANW is negative at -69.61%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
-0.26%
Negative yoy SBC while PANW is 2.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
184.85%
Slight usage while PANW is negative at -37.71%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-553.16%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PANW at -619.58%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-78.85%
Negative yoy inventory while PANW is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
548.77%
AP growth well above PANW's 108.11%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
344.01%
Growth well above PANW's 575.69%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
53.75%
Some yoy increase while PANW is negative at -84.21%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
16.54%
Some CFO growth while PANW is negative at -3.06%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-26.67%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -26.74%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
14.79%
Acquisition growth of 14.79% while PANW is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-29.68%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -124.12%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
-32.34%
We reduce yoy sales while PANW is 50.85%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
70.18%
We have some outflow growth while PANW is negative at -100.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
-38.77%
Both yoy lines negative, with PANW at -248.98%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-54.86%
We cut debt repayment yoy while PANW is 69.84%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
2.30%
Issuance growth of 2.30% 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.
0.07%
Buyback growth below 50% of PANW's 99.22%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.