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.
5.24%
Similar revenue growth to PANW's 5.87%. Walter Schloss would investigate if similar growth reflects similar quality.
13.18%
Cost growth above 1.5x PANW's 0.93%. Michael Burry would check for structural cost disadvantages.
1.70%
Gross profit growth below 50% of PANW's 7.93%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-3.36%
Margin decline while PANW shows 1.95% expansion. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
3.26%
R&D growth less than half of PANW's 8.69%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
67.17%
G&A growth above 1.5x PANW's 20.00%. Michael Burry would check for operational inefficiency.
10.79%
Marketing expense growth above 1.5x PANW's 1.71%. Michael Burry would check for spending discipline.
-22.58%
Other expenses reduction while PANW shows 0.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
12.99%
Operating expenses growth above 1.5x PANW's 5.77%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
13.09%
Total costs growth above 1.5x PANW's 4.33%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
-2.00%
Interest expense reduction while PANW shows 38.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
30.75%
D&A growth above 1.5x PANW's 16.55%. Michael Burry would check for excessive investment.
-0.45%
EBITDA decline while PANW shows 102.21% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-5.77%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-5.20%
Operating income decline while PANW shows 40.79% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-9.92%
Operating margin decline while PANW shows 32.99% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-211.11%
Other expenses reduction while PANW shows 131.77% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-5.72%
Pre-tax income decline while PANW shows 145.35% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-10.41%
Pre-tax margin decline while PANW shows 131.76% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-2.54%
Both companies reducing tax expense. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-6.44%
Net income decline while PANW shows 321.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-11.10%
Net margin decline while PANW shows 297.67% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-6.38%
EPS decline while PANW shows 300.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-6.38%
Diluted EPS decline while PANW shows 316.67% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-0.08%
Share count reduction while PANW shows 0.83% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-0.16%
Both companies reducing diluted shares. Martin Whitman would check patterns.