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.
-0.77%
Revenue decline while PANW shows 7.92% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position erosion.
8.93%
Similar cost growth to PANW's 9.99%. Walter Schloss would investigate if industry cost pressures are temporary.
-5.44%
Gross profit decline while PANW shows 7.14% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
-4.70%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-1.86%
R&D reduction while PANW shows 13.63% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive risk.
-16.17%
G&A reduction while PANW shows 21.85% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency advantage.
-20.38%
Both companies reducing marketing spend. Martin Whitman would check industry trends.
46.97%
Other expenses growth less than half of PANW's 106.09%. David Dodd would verify if advantage is sustainable.
-13.45%
Operating expenses reduction while PANW shows 4.89% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-3.31%
Total costs reduction while PANW shows 6.10% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-4.73%
Interest expense reduction while PANW shows 0.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-18.03%
Both companies reducing D&A. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-11.82%
EBITDA decline while PANW shows 89.19% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
1.90%
EBITDA margin growth below 50% of PANW's 31.06%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-9.84%
Operating income decline while PANW shows 6.62% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-9.14%
Operating margin decline while PANW shows 13.47% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-45.26%
Other expenses reduction while PANW shows 31.48% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-10.35%
Pre-tax income decline while PANW shows 12.10% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-9.65%
Pre-tax margin decline while PANW shows 18.55% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-30.99%
Tax expense reduction while PANW shows 238.90% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-1.56%
Net income decline while PANW shows 6.21% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-0.79%
Net margin decline while PANW shows 13.09% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-1.79%
EPS decline while PANW shows 7.14% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-1.82%
Diluted EPS decline while PANW shows 7.14% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
0.04%
Share count reduction exceeding 1.5x PANW's 2.03%. David Dodd would verify capital allocation.
0.07%
Diluted share reduction exceeding 1.5x PANW's 1.98%. David Dodd would verify capital allocation.