PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
229.02 - 234.51
169.21 - 260.10
55.82M / 54.92M (Avg.)
32.24 | 7.26
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.
-41.75%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 64.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-37.84%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with GPRO at -1.16%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
-521.43%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-355.69%
Negative yoy working capital usage while GPRO is 147.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-572.50%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -171.20%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-6.53%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with GPRO at -51.71%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
-40.51%
Negative yoy AP while GPRO is 111.39%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-380.95%
Negative yoy usage while GPRO is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
592.31%
Some yoy increase while GPRO is negative at -92.90%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-2488.46%
Negative yoy CFO while GPRO is 115.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
15.52%
Lower CapEx growth vs. GPRO's 63.37%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
81.90%
Purchases growth of 81.90% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-41.88%
We reduce yoy sales while GPRO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
318.18%
Investing outflow well above GPRO's 63.37%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
169.23%
We slightly raise equity while GPRO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.