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.
8.60%
Similar revenue growth to PANW's 9.32%. Walter Schloss would investigate if similar growth reflects similar quality.
12.43%
Similar cost growth to PANW's 12.43%. Walter Schloss would investigate if industry cost pressures are temporary.
6.85%
Similar gross profit growth to PANW's 8.00%. Walter Schloss would investigate industry dynamics.
-1.61%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
6.69%
R&D growth 50-75% of PANW's 9.98%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine spending effectiveness.
30.09%
G&A growth while PANW reduces overhead. John Neff would investigate operational differences.
10.30%
Marketing expense growth above 1.5x PANW's 0.72%. Michael Burry would check for spending discipline.
600.00%
Other expenses growth while PANW reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
10.98%
Operating expenses growth above 1.5x PANW's 1.53%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
11.70%
Total costs growth above 1.5x PANW's 4.57%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
11.73%
Interest expense growth less than half of PANW's 61.86%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
12.38%
D&A growth 1.1-1.25x PANW's 11.16%. Bill Ackman would demand investment justification.
9.44%
EBITDA growth below 50% of PANW's 216.76%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-3.84%
EBITDA margin decline while PANW shows 67.87% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
3.33%
Operating income growth below 50% of PANW's 68.50%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-4.85%
Operating margin decline while PANW shows 71.18% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
111.36%
Other expenses growth while PANW reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
4.51%
Pre-tax income growth below 50% of PANW's 28.61%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-3.77%
Pre-tax margin decline while PANW shows 34.70% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
6.17%
Tax expense growth less than half of PANW's 50.00%. David Dodd would verify if advantage is sustainable.
4.19%
Net income growth below 50% of PANW's 21.26%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-4.07%
Net margin decline while PANW shows 27.97% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
4.96%
EPS growth below 50% of PANW's 23.08%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
4.29%
Diluted EPS growth below 50% of PANW's 23.08%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-0.29%
Both companies reducing share counts. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-0.33%
Both companies reducing diluted shares. Martin Whitman would check patterns.