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.
9.28%
Net income growth under 50% of GPRO's 736.25%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
1.18%
Less D&A growth vs. GPRO's 8.26%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-173.70%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
5.25%
Less SBC growth vs. GPRO's 38.40%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
327.27%
Slight usage while GPRO is negative at -336.76%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-502.21%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -97.79%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-204.68%
Negative yoy inventory while GPRO is 2.44%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
5528.85%
A yoy AP increase while GPRO is negative at -13.19%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
430.00%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. GPRO's 902.45%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
29.21%
Some CFO growth while GPRO is negative at -8.07%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-58.45%
Negative yoy CapEx while GPRO is 54.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-745.72%
Negative yoy acquisition while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
19.68%
Purchases growth of 19.68% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
30.19%
Liquidation growth of 30.19% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-70.00%
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.
113.49%
We have mild expansions while GPRO is negative at -960.49%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
213.83%
We slightly raise equity while GPRO is negative at -55.69%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
-240.00%
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.