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.
36.26%
Net income growth under 50% of GPRO's 228.08%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
8.39%
Some D&A expansion while GPRO is negative at -32.38%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-451.16%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
0.20%
SBC growth while GPRO is negative at -28.06%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
177.20%
Slight usage while GPRO is negative at -366.64%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-1054.08%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -276.80%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-152.26%
Negative yoy inventory while GPRO is 187.53%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
8027.73%
A yoy AP increase while GPRO is negative at -105.87%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
163.98%
Growth well above GPRO's 307.43%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-149.60%
Negative yoy while GPRO is 56.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
71.11%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of GPRO's 289.08%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-38.85%
Negative yoy CapEx while GPRO is 52.73%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
95.94%
Acquisition growth of 95.94% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-120.96%
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.
-45.45%
We reduce yoy sales while GPRO is 28.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-171.81%
We reduce yoy other investing while GPRO is 606.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-102.90%
We reduce yoy invests while GPRO stands at 1546.21%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-10.17%
We cut debt repayment yoy while GPRO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
38900.00%
We slightly raise equity while GPRO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly preserving share count or buying back shares.
-2.88%
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.