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.
2.08%
Revenue growth below 50% of PANW's 21.23%. Michael Burry would check for competitive disadvantage risks.
4.29%
Cost growth less than half of PANW's 15.41%. David Dodd would verify if cost advantage is structural.
0.99%
Gross profit growth below 50% of PANW's 23.43%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-1.06%
Margin decline while PANW shows 1.82% expansion. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
3.69%
R&D growth less than half of PANW's 9.49%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
16.59%
G&A growth above 1.5x PANW's 5.88%. Michael Burry would check for operational inefficiency.
6.79%
Marketing expense growth less than half of PANW's 23.97%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
114.81%
Other expenses growth while PANW reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
6.98%
Operating expenses growth less than half of PANW's 18.20%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
5.69%
Total costs growth less than half of PANW's 17.54%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
17.06%
Interest expense growth above 1.5x PANW's 0.62%. Michael Burry would check for over-leverage.
-1.45%
D&A reduction while PANW shows 17.02% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
-100.19%
EBITDA decline while PANW shows 11.60% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-6.65%
EBITDA margin decline while PANW shows 26.35% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-131.13%
Operating income decline while PANW shows 5.97% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-130.50%
Operating margin decline while PANW shows 22.43% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
485.71%
Other expenses growth while PANW reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-126.94%
Pre-tax income decline while PANW shows 4.40% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-126.40%
Pre-tax margin decline while PANW shows 21.14% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-6.07%
Tax expense reduction while PANW shows 53.93% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-164.09%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-162.79%
Net margin decline while PANW shows 17.45% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-165.57%
EPS decline while PANW shows 5.26% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-165.57%
Diluted EPS decline while PANW shows 5.26% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-1.30%
Share count reduction while PANW shows 2.03% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-2.14%
Diluted share reduction while PANW shows 2.03% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.