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.
-15.00%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 64.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-28.00%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with GPRO at -1.16%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
-76.60%
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.
200.00%
Well above GPRO's 147.14% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
151.85%
AR growth while GPRO is negative at -171.20%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-660.00%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with GPRO at -51.71%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
264.79%
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.
142.86%
Growth well above GPRO's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-56.86%
Both negative yoy, with GPRO at -92.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-32.48%
Negative yoy CFO while GPRO is 115.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-181.82%
Negative yoy CapEx while GPRO is 63.37%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
64.71%
Acquisition growth of 64.71% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-4.01%
Negative yoy purchasing while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-4.61%
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.
-500.00%
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.
36.44%
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.
1066.67%
We slightly raise equity while GPRO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
50.00%
Buyback growth of 50.00% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.