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.
-9.00%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 64.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
3.35%
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.
10.12%
Some yoy growth while GPRO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
12.68%
SBC growth while GPRO is negative at -4.73%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-206.07%
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.
-22.14%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -171.20%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
48.76%
Some inventory rise while GPRO is negative at -51.71%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
-201.88%
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.
-104.79%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-59.70%
Negative yoy CFO while GPRO is 115.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
21.00%
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.
6.06%
Purchases growth of 6.06% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
33.85%
Liquidation growth of 33.85% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
214.29%
Growth of 214.29% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
97.90%
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.
-57.22%
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.