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.
-21.79%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with GPRO at -279.57%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
-11.99%
Negative yoy D&A while GPRO is 9.60%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-35.67%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
2.20%
Less SBC growth vs. GPRO's 746.99%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
-101.34%
Both reduce yoy usage, with GPRO at -783.05%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
509.74%
AR growth while GPRO is negative at -102.87%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
181.84%
Some inventory rise while GPRO is negative at -60.55%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
-229.00%
Negative yoy AP while GPRO is 84.19%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-96.64%
Both reduce yoy usage, with GPRO at -158.37%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-40.28%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with GPRO at -161.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
27.30%
Some CapEx rise while GPRO is negative at -69.24%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
93.52%
Acquisition growth of 93.52% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
13.29%
Purchases growth of 13.29% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
54.09%
Liquidation growth of 54.09% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-660.00%
We reduce yoy other investing while GPRO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
177.74%
We have mild expansions while GPRO is negative at -131.18%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
54.48%
We slightly raise equity while GPRO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
-257.35%
We cut yoy buybacks while GPRO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.