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.
-19.03%
Negative net income growth while PLTR stands at 65.94%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
1.61%
Less D&A growth vs. PLTR's 30.87%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-83.45%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
6.05%
SBC growth while PLTR is negative at -30.02%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
130.75%
Slight usage while PLTR is negative at -174.68%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
200.20%
AR growth while PLTR is negative at -171.16%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-396.46%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with PLTR at -3284.25%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
-143.28%
Both negative yoy AP, with PLTR at -191.55%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-165.97%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PLTR at -146.40%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
103.42%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. PLTR's 334.26%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
-14.22%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with PLTR at -185.77%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
16.44%
Some CapEx rise while PLTR is negative at -40.34%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-64.41%
Negative yoy acquisition while PLTR stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-51.47%
Negative yoy purchasing while PLTR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
103.41%
Liquidation growth of 103.41% while PLTR is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
170.80%
Growth well above PLTR's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
75.53%
Investing outflow well above PLTR's 72.62%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-150.00%
We cut debt repayment yoy while PLTR is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
38.64%
Issuance growth of 38.64% 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.
-6.02%
We cut yoy buybacks while PLTR is 8.53%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.