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.
4.19%
Net income growth under 50% of PLTR's 82.62%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
12.38%
Less D&A growth vs. PLTR's 41.67%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-125.40%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
0.82%
SBC growth while PLTR is negative at -71.45%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
68.49%
Slight usage while PLTR is negative at -159.70%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-1149.94%
AR is negative yoy while PLTR is 107.57%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-238.67%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with PLTR at -201.70%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
454.21%
A yoy AP increase while PLTR is negative at -194.13%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
13958.21%
Some yoy usage while PLTR is negative at -37.56%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-251.92%
Negative yoy while PLTR is 16939.91%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
6.68%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of PLTR's 64.82%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-25.94%
Both yoy lines negative, with PLTR at -211.18%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-401.52%
Negative yoy acquisition while PLTR stands at 82.64%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-18.66%
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.
9.95%
Liquidation growth of 9.95% while PLTR is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-129.93%
We reduce yoy other investing while PLTR is 1200.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-8849.02%
Both yoy lines negative, with PLTR at -15.54%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
100.00%
Debt repayment growth of 100.00% while PLTR is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-0.58%
Negative yoy issuance while PLTR is 35.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
17.96%
Buyback growth of 17.96% while PLTR is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.