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.
65.06%
Some net income increase while GPRO is negative at -211.92%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
-5.29%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with GPRO at -13.28%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
210.71%
Some yoy growth while GPRO is negative at -125.50%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
17.81%
SBC growth while GPRO is negative at -13.18%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
1474.69%
Well above GPRO's 115.95% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
160.13%
AR growth is negative or stable vs. GPRO's 496.92%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd would confirm it doesn't hamper sales volume.
66.78%
Some inventory rise while GPRO is negative at -52.12%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
-109.83%
Both negative yoy AP, with GPRO at -88.01%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-1550.00%
Negative yoy usage while GPRO is 3.83%. 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.
103.81%
Some CFO growth while GPRO is negative at -259.56%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-9.51%
Negative yoy CapEx while GPRO is 56.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
23.89%
Acquisition growth of 23.89% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-66.08%
Negative yoy purchasing while GPRO stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
1.09%
Below 50% of GPRO's 7.95%. Michael Burry would see minimal near-term inflows vs. competitor’s liquidation approach.
-7.50%
We reduce yoy other investing while GPRO is 45.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-1387.27%
Both yoy lines negative, with GPRO at -94.74%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
100.00%
Debt repayment growth of 100.00% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-99.54%
Negative yoy issuance while GPRO is 136.68%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
48.22%
Buyback growth below 50% of GPRO's 100.00%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.