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.
32.43%
Net income growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 64.84%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging competitiveness unless expansions are planned.
20.51%
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.
-64.94%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
2.28%
SBC growth while GPRO is negative at -4.73%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
2.92%
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.
-267.74%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -171.20%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
64.14%
Some inventory rise while GPRO is negative at -51.71%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
23.50%
Lower AP growth vs. GPRO's 111.39%, indicating prompt payments. David Dodd would confirm no lost opportunity in interest-free credit if expansions are underfunded.
58.08%
Growth well above GPRO's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.37%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of GPRO's 115.30%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-29.87%
Negative yoy CapEx while GPRO is 63.37%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
92.07%
Acquisition growth of 92.07% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-1.39%
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.
9.53%
Liquidation growth of 9.53% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
152.17%
Growth of 152.17% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
19.28%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. GPRO's 63.37%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-10.05%
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.