PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
176.45 - 178.59
86.62 - 184.48
124.91M / 173.95M (Avg.)
50.81 | 3.50
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-168.40%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with AVGO at -616.67%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
11.96%
Some D&A expansion while AVGO is negative at -4.88%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-182.21%
Negative yoy deferred tax while AVGO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-100.00%
Negative yoy SBC while AVGO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
213.49%
Well above AVGO's 198.04% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-100.00%
AR is negative yoy while AVGO is 104.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
80.39%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AVGO's 180.00%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
100.00%
AP growth well above AVGO's 120.00%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
708.31%
Growth well above AVGO's 162.50%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
570.31%
Growth of 570.31% while AVGO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might reflect intangible expansions or partial write-offs.
-44.26%
Negative yoy CFO while AVGO is 1750.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
73.53%
Some CapEx rise while AVGO is negative at -8.33%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
100.00%
Acquisition growth of 100.00% while AVGO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-34.32%
Negative yoy purchasing while AVGO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-51.50%
We reduce yoy sales while AVGO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
314.53%
Growth of 314.53% while AVGO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-811.88%
Both yoy lines negative, with AVGO at -50.00%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-68.73%
Negative yoy issuance while AVGO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
100.00%
Buyback growth of 100.00% while AVGO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.