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.
-58.58%
Negative net income growth while VET stands at 35.12%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-11.88%
Negative yoy D&A while VET is 4.77%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-49.67%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
314.29%
SBC growth while VET is negative at -36.33%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-259.32%
Negative yoy working capital usage while VET is 95.95%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-113.10%
AR is negative yoy while VET is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-259.32%
Negative yoy usage while VET is 95.95%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
163.89%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. VET's 851.68%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
-47.13%
Negative yoy CFO while VET is 67.36%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
40.11%
Some CapEx rise while VET is negative at -26.12%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-120.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while VET stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-115.60%
Negative yoy purchasing while VET stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
1691.67%
Liquidation growth of 1691.67% while VET is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
40.11%
Less 'other investing' outflow yoy vs. VET's 136.14%. David Dodd would see a stronger short-term cash position unless competitor invests more wisely.
20.47%
We have mild expansions while VET is negative at -16.33%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-93.57%
We cut debt repayment yoy while VET is 65.08%. 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.