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.
178.30%
Net income growth above 1.5x GPRO's 64.84%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
2.50%
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.
-132.00%
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.
14.34%
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.
37.24%
AR growth while GPRO is negative at -171.20%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-89.66%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with GPRO at -51.71%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
-26.67%
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.
-237.50%
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.
3450.00%
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.
74.94%
Operating cash flow growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 115.30%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging operational liquidity vs. competitor.
1.69%
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.
-145.18%
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.
176.44%
Liquidation growth of 176.44% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
550.00%
Growth of 550.00% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-116.95%
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.
135.19%
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.