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.
64.86%
Net income growth similar to GPRO's 64.84%. Walter Schloss would find parallel expansions or market conditions in both firms’ profitability.
5.26%
Some D&A expansion while GPRO is negative at -1.16%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
228.00%
Some yoy growth while GPRO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
31.67%
Less working capital growth vs. GPRO's 147.14%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-198.14%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -171.20%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
138.46%
Some inventory rise while GPRO is negative at -51.71%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
1710.00%
AP growth well above GPRO's 111.39%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
133.33%
Growth well above GPRO's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-211.90%
Both negative yoy, with GPRO at -92.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
71.10%
Operating cash flow growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 115.30%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging operational liquidity vs. competitor.
-137.50%
Negative yoy CapEx while GPRO is 63.37%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
47.06%
Purchases growth of 47.06% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-40.69%
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.
-192.86%
We reduce yoy other investing while GPRO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
85.98%
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.
-62.22%
Both yoy lines negative, with GPRO at -100.00%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment or preference for internal financing over new equity in the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.