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.
-1.56%
Negative net income growth while PLTR stands at 50.92%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-18.03%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with PLTR at -1.39%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
181.57%
Deferred tax of 181.57% while PLTR is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
4.53%
SBC growth well above PLTR's 2.98%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
-13.53%
Negative yoy working capital usage while PLTR is 259.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
223.57%
AR growth well above PLTR's 78.85%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-142.71%
Negative yoy inventory while PLTR is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-176.36%
Negative yoy AP while PLTR is 15.24%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-63.29%
Negative yoy usage while PLTR is 134.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
4.21%
Some yoy increase while PLTR is negative at -1863.22%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-12.19%
Negative yoy CFO while PLTR is 73.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
3.61%
Some CapEx rise while PLTR is negative at -23.45%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
97.49%
Acquisition growth of 97.49% while PLTR is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-2.61%
Negative yoy purchasing while PLTR stands at 48.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-16.63%
Both yoy lines are negative, with PLTR at -13.83%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-55.51%
Both yoy lines negative, with PLTR at -33.33%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
13.16%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. PLTR's 55.62%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
25.00%
Debt repayment growth of 25.00% while PLTR is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
47.95%
Issuance growth of 47.95% while PLTR 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.
-146.84%
Both yoy lines negative, with PLTR at -3.32%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.