Net Income Doesn't Matter. Look for Free Cash Flow (FCF).
A quick note on why free cash flow should be your guiding light - not necessarily net income...
Hi, Investor 👋
I’m Jimmy, and welcome to another free edition 🔓 of our newsletter.
This one’s for those who see beyond the surface: we’re breaking down why net income often misleads, and why Free Cash Flow (FCF) is the real signal of business strength.
Let’s dive in…
In case you missed it, here are some recent insights:
Subscribe now and never miss a single report:
In investing, few metrics are more misleading - yet more frequently cited - than net income.
It looks precise. It sounds definitive…
But in reality, net income is often a poor proxy for how much value a business is truly generating.
Free Cash Flow (FCF), on the other hand, is the real test. It tells you how much cash a company is generating after reinvesting what it needs to survive.
In other words: FCF is what you can actually take home.
Accounting Earnings vs. Economic Reality:
Net income is based on accrual accounting.
That means revenues and expenses are matched to when they’re earned or incurred, not when cash is received or spent.
It's helpful for financial reporting - but often useless for investment analysis…
Depreciation, for example, is a non-cash expense.
Working capital changes may not reflect core business performance.
And large capex investments are often smoothed over time through straight-line depreciation - even when the cash outflows were immediate and massive.
FCF ignores all that noise.
Free Cash Flow = Operating Cash Flow – Capital Expenditures
It measures how much real cash a company is generating net of what it must reinvest to maintain its business.
Found this content valuable? Share it with your network! Help others discover these insights by sharing the newsletter. Your support makes all the difference!
Why Free Cash Flow > Net Income:
Let’s compare two companies:
Company A:
Net Income = $200M
Capex = $250M
Operating Cash Flow = $230M
FCF = –$20M
Company B:
Net Income = $150M
Capex = $20M
Operating Cash Flow = $180M
FCF = $160M
Which one is the better business?
Company A might look great on the income statement - but it's bleeding cash. Company B, despite reporting a lower net income, is actually generating substantial value for shareholders.
There’s a phrase I’m proud to say I came up with (I think):
A company is nothing more than people, processes, and a bank account.
What do I mean by that? Accrual accounting matters, sure - but it doesn’t put cash in the bank. It doesn’t pay the bills. It doesn’t fund dividends.
What’s the point of generating millions in revenue, reporting 20% margins, and never actually seeing any of that money? Your company only exists in a fantasy world...
Introducing Free Cash Flow Yield:
One of the most useful tools for investors is the Free Cash Flow Yield (FCFY):
FCFY (%) = Free Cash Flow / Market Capitalization
It tells you how much cash a company is generating relative to its current valuation.
Let’s say a commodity company is trading at a $50B market cap and, thanks to all-time high prices, is generating $5B in FCF this year. That’s a 10% free cash flow yield.
In value investing, these yields often spike when companies are temporarily overearning - a classic feature of cyclical industries like oil, metals, or agriculture.
But here's the nuance:
A high FCFY can indicate a bargain - if earnings are sustainable!!!
Or a value trap - if current FCF is unsustainable and the market is pricing in the eventual mean reversion.
Understanding the drivers of FCF is key.
Enjoying the content? Don’t miss out on more exclusive insights and analyses. Subscribe now and stay updated.
Advanced Example: Timing and Value Destruction
Let’s go deeper with a capital budgeting example.
Suppose a company invests $10M upfront to build a facility that generates $1.3M in FCF per year for 10 years. At a 5% discount rate:
This is a breakeven project in economic terms.
Now consider how GAAP might report this: the $10M is depreciated over 10 years ($1M/year). Assume $2.5M in revenue and $2.2M in operating expenses annually.
→ Net Income = $300K/year
→ PV of Net Income ≈ $2.3M
The project looks profitable on paper - but it’s barely returning its cost of capital. That gap between accounting and economics is where bad capital allocation happens…
As Ben Graham once said:
“The worth of a business is measured not by what has been put into it, but by what can be taken out of it.”
In other words, free cash flow.
Capital Allocation: The Real Driver of Long-Term Returns
Ultimately, a company is just a portfolio of projects.
What matters isn’t just how much cash a company generates - but what it does with that cash.
If management reinvests at returns above the cost of capital, intrinsic value grows.
If not, value is destroyed - even if net income and EPS are rising.
This is why FCF and Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) together are such a powerful duo. FCF tells you what’s available; ROIC tells you how efficiently it’s being used.
Found this content valuable? Share it with your network! Help others discover these insights by sharing the newsletter. Your support makes all the difference!
Bottom Line: Cash is King
Net income can be manipulated.
FCF is hard to fake.
It’s the money available to reward shareholders. It’s what funds buybacks, dividends, and growth. And over time, it’s what ultimately drives shareholder returns.
Before investing, ask:
Is this company generating real, recurring FCF?
Is the FCF yield attractive relative to risk and sustainability?
Is capital being reinvested at high enough returns?
Earnings might win the quarter, but free cash flow wins the decade.
See you next time,
Jimmy
Disclaimer
As a reader of Jimmy’s Journal, you agree with our disclaimer. You can read the full disclaimer here.
This is an excellent informative analysis.
I recently analyzed CrowdStrike, which reported a negative net income and appeared unprofitable. However, it had significant R&D investments that weren't accounted for, and with depreciation, this metric did not accurately reflect the company's financial performance. Upon further analysis of FCF, it became clear that this was not the case. Further taking into account cash and cash equivalents, I realized that they had a more nuanced approach to managing their profits, assets, and other key metrics.
Additionally, understanding FCF can help an investor look out for possible changes in a company. For example, if a private equity firm becomes involved, noticing that the company has healthy cash flow and free cash flow, it may conduct a reorg to try to bolster the company and drive growth. Of course, this is very specific, but it illustrates how much more an investor can understand and make predictions about a company beyond metrics like net income and other ones that don't showcase the workings and interconnectedness of a company.
Thanks for sharing!
Hot take warning.
Investors need to stop getting a hard on over FCF. Yes, FCF is what ultimately matters for a business, but cash flow in any given year is often completely unrepresentative of profitability, because capex is lumpy and working capital flows in and out. Most growing businesses generate zero cash flow for years, even decades, because they're reinvesting all that cash into working capital and fixed assets, to expand the business. But the underlying business may still be incredibly profitable, and the second they stop growing so fast, that will come through.
That is exactly the reason accrual accounting was invented. "Not all changes of wealth are cash-based, and not all flows of cash change wealth." If I was asked to estimate a company's value knowing either its single-year net income or its single-year cash flow, I would much rather have the net income figure, despite all its issues.
Also, the quote, "A company is nothing more than people, processes, and a bank account" - the reason people don't say that it because it isn't true. You forgot non-cash capital. That stuff matters.