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.
-13.72%
Revenue decline while PANW shows 3.32% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position erosion.
-21.78%
Cost reduction while PANW shows 0.74% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive advantage.
-8.01%
Gross profit decline while PANW shows 4.32% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
6.62%
Margin expansion exceeding 1.5x PANW's 0.98%. David Dodd would verify competitive advantages.
2.76%
R&D change of 2.76% while PANW maintains spending. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate effectiveness.
9.83%
G&A growth while PANW reduces overhead. John Neff would investigate operational differences.
-13.99%
Marketing expense reduction while PANW shows 7.68% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive risk.
-250.00%
Both companies reducing other expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-4.71%
Operating expenses reduction while PANW shows 4.63% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-14.19%
Total costs reduction while PANW shows 3.69% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
10.03%
Interest expense change of 10.03% while PANW maintains costs. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate control.
10.56%
D&A growth 1.1-1.25x PANW's 8.74%. Bill Ackman would demand investment justification.
-12.33%
Both companies show EBITDA decline. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
6.47%
EBITDA margin growth while PANW declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-12.33%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
1.61%
Operating margin growth while PANW declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-44.44%
Both companies reducing other expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-13.99%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-0.31%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
52.93%
Tax expense growth 50-75% of PANW's 74.36%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine efficiency.
-25.15%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-13.25%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-23.81%
Both companies show declining EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-24.19%
Both companies show declining diluted EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-0.87%
Share count reduction while PANW shows 1.39% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-0.82%
Diluted share reduction while PANW shows 1.39% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.