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.
-36.35%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 329.55%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
5.42%
D&A growth of 5.42% while MU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
38.10%
Deferred tax of 38.10% while MU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
41.63%
SBC growth of 41.63% while MU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see some additional share issuance that must be justified by expansions or retention needs.
123.12%
Slight usage while MU is negative at -354.22%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-95.75%
AR is negative yoy while MU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
1839.83%
Some inventory rise while MU is negative at -31.11%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
103.38%
AP growth of 103.38% while MU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
-214.54%
Both reduce yoy usage, with MU at -736.84%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
-110.28%
Both negative yoy, with MU at -51.35%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
816.19%
Some CFO growth while MU is negative at -8.68%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
51.65%
Some CapEx rise while MU is negative at -26.53%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-100.00%
Both yoy lines negative, with MU at -100.00%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
-162.41%
Both yoy lines negative, with MU at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
137.66%
We have some liquidation growth while MU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
100.00%
Growth well above MU's 167.27%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
71.60%
We have mild expansions while MU is negative at -457.14%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
481.78%
Issuance growth of 481.78% while MU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild dilution that must be justified by expansions or acquisitions vs. competitor’s stable share base.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.