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.
-31.11%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 51.18%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-0.22%
Negative yoy D&A while GPRO is 2.99%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
98.52%
Well above GPRO's 94.60% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
4.01%
SBC growth while GPRO is negative at -7.50%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-105.64%
Negative yoy working capital usage while GPRO is 134.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
263.25%
AR growth while GPRO is negative at -212.58%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-846.77%
Negative yoy inventory while GPRO is 159.45%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-295.25%
Negative yoy AP while GPRO is 105.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-130.76%
Both reduce yoy usage, with GPRO at -111.05%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
-1172.73%
Both negative yoy, with GPRO at -70.77%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-46.52%
Negative yoy CFO while GPRO is 98.92%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-49.29%
Negative yoy CapEx while GPRO is 98.58%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
23.70%
Acquisition growth of 23.70% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
82.62%
Purchases well above GPRO's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see major cash outflow into securities vs. competitor’s approach, risking near-term FCF.
29.59%
We have some liquidation growth while GPRO is negative at -25.00%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
702.33%
Growth well above GPRO's 193.89%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
311.26%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. GPRO's 988.20%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-125.42%
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.