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.
35.71%
Net income growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 64.84%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging competitiveness unless expansions are planned.
-17.24%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with GPRO at -1.16%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
71.43%
Some yoy growth while GPRO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
600.00%
SBC growth while GPRO is negative at -4.73%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-142.31%
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.
-1620.00%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -171.20%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-139.42%
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.
50.00%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. GPRO's 100.00%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
50.00%
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.
-91.84%
Negative yoy CFO while GPRO is 115.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-15.00%
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.
-108.98%
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.
-14.56%
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.
200.00%
Growth of 200.00% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-89.38%
We reduce yoy invests while GPRO stands at 63.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
400.00%
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.