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.
0.59%
Some net income increase while VET is negative at -3675.92%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
2.28%
Some D&A expansion while VET is negative at -8.64%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
75.62%
Well above VET's 24.16% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
-43.48%
Both cut yoy SBC, with VET at -169.95%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
99.39%
Well above VET's 157.38% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-63.37%
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.
97.65%
AP growth of 97.65% while VET is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
77.17%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. VET's 157.38%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
-102.14%
Both negative yoy, with VET at -81.59%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
52.98%
Some CFO growth while VET is negative at -24.83%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-3.79%
Negative yoy CapEx while VET is 42.23%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
99.02%
Some acquisitions while VET is negative at -1337.99%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pausing M&A or divesting while the firm invests in new deals.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-365.49%
Both yoy lines negative, with VET at -494.01%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
17.07%
Investing outflow well above VET's 15.62%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
75.38%
We repay more while VET is negative at -595.19%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
26.40%
We have some buyback growth while VET is negative at -27.87%. John Neff sees a short-term advantage in boosting EPS unless expansions hamper competitor.