PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
40.40 - 41.05
29.80 - 47.18
2.12M / 3.66M (Avg.)
18.02 | 2.27
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.
93.57%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x VET's 84.80%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify whether cost discipline or revenue gains drive the outperformance.
-1.55%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with VET at -13.39%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
53.71%
Lower deferred tax growth vs. VET's 527.29%, implying fewer future tax liabilities. David Dodd would confirm there’s no short-term tax shock instead.
-209.09%
Negative yoy SBC while VET is 112.36%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-100.41%
Both reduce yoy usage, with VET at -353.56%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.41%
Negative yoy usage while VET is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
1740.00%
Some yoy increase while VET is negative at -194.78%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-37.22%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with VET at -32.63%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
-0.13%
Both yoy lines negative, with VET at -4073.05%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
4380.65%
Acquisition growth of 4380.65% while VET is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
151.67%
Purchases growth of 151.67% while VET is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
0.13%
Liquidation growth of 0.13% while VET is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-0.39%
We reduce yoy other investing while VET is 221.28%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
167.36%
We have mild expansions while VET is negative at -332.50%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-200.00%
We cut debt repayment yoy while VET is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.