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
Helps investors judge whether earnings growth is driven by sustainable operations or temporary factors. Consistent, organic income expansion can justify a higher intrinsic value for patient, long-term investors.
14.60%
Similar revenue growth to PANW's 18.27%. Walter Schloss would investigate if similar growth reflects similar quality.
27.05%
Cost growth 1.1-1.25x PANW's 22.40%. Bill Ackman would demand evidence of cost control initiatives.
9.44%
Gross profit growth 50-75% of PANW's 16.79%. Martin Whitman would scrutinize competitive position.
-4.50%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
13.85%
Similar R&D growth to PANW's 17.94%. Walter Schloss would investigate industry innovation requirements.
17.75%
G&A growth while PANW reduces overhead. John Neff would investigate operational differences.
32.19%
Marketing expense growth 1.1-1.25x PANW's 26.99%. Bill Ackman would demand evidence of superior returns.
8.33%
Other expenses growth while PANW reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
23.18%
Operating expenses growth above 1.5x PANW's 14.40%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
24.90%
Total costs growth above 1.5x PANW's 16.22%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
-3.43%
Both companies reducing interest expense. Martin Whitman would check industry trends.
38.80%
D&A growth 50-75% of PANW's 70.79%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine asset strategy.
21.71%
EBITDA growth while PANW declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-11.37%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-7.05%
Operating income decline while PANW shows 81.59% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-18.90%
Operating margin decline while PANW shows 84.44% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
658.82%
Other expenses growth while PANW reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-5.46%
Pre-tax income decline while PANW shows 76.14% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-17.51%
Pre-tax margin decline while PANW shows 79.82% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
51.50%
Tax expense growth while PANW reduces burden. John Neff would investigate differences.
-18.52%
Net income decline while PANW shows 76.96% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-28.90%
Net margin decline while PANW shows 80.52% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-17.65%
EPS decline while PANW shows 77.42% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-19.12%
Diluted EPS decline while PANW shows 77.42% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-0.46%
Share count reduction while PANW shows 3.80% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-0.26%
Diluted share reduction while PANW shows 3.86% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.