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.
-17.82%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 266.72%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
4.91%
Some D&A expansion while GPRO is negative at -23.77%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-156.90%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
-1.93%
Negative yoy SBC while GPRO is 13.08%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-170.57%
Negative yoy working capital usage while GPRO is 67.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
178.56%
AR growth while GPRO is negative at -173.43%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
70.95%
Inventory growth well above GPRO's 136.51%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
-209.22%
Negative yoy AP while GPRO is 116.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-77.55%
Negative yoy usage while GPRO is 7705.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-2096.00%
Both negative yoy, with GPRO at -6.21%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-38.13%
Negative yoy CFO while GPRO is 190.91%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
35.17%
CapEx growth well above GPRO's 11.05%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
100.00%
Acquisition growth of 100.00% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
13.01%
Purchases growth of 13.01% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-22.57%
We reduce yoy sales while GPRO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-100.00%
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.
-20.78%
Both yoy lines negative, with GPRO at -3068.54%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-250.00%
We cut debt repayment yoy while GPRO is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
23.93%
Buyback growth of 23.93% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.