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.
-27.00%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with GPRO at -122.08%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
6.55%
Less D&A growth vs. GPRO's 45.18%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-34.01%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
5.50%
Less SBC growth vs. GPRO's 20.86%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
-101.25%
Both reduce yoy usage, with GPRO at -2365.78%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
775.75%
AR growth while GPRO is negative at -78.10%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
131.63%
Inventory growth well above GPRO's 8.35%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
-271.96%
Both negative yoy AP, with GPRO at -282.46%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-104.35%
Negative yoy usage while GPRO is 108.23%. 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.
-46.62%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with GPRO at -210.41%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
6.35%
Lower CapEx growth vs. GPRO's 65.30%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
94.72%
Acquisition growth of 94.72% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-18.23%
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.
20.81%
Liquidation growth of 20.81% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
21.15%
Growth of 21.15% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-6.18%
We reduce yoy invests while GPRO stands at 65.30%. 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.
161.84%
We slightly raise equity while GPRO is negative at -44.32%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
100.00%
Buyback growth of 100.00% 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.