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.
-7.98%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 1739.08%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
1.25%
Some D&A expansion while GPRO is negative at -12.03%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-255.70%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
-1.06%
Both cut yoy SBC, with GPRO at -6.98%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-24.29%
Negative yoy working capital usage while GPRO is 170.16%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-88.01%
AR is negative yoy while GPRO is 90.43%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
104.71%
Some inventory rise while GPRO is negative at -378.24%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
100.89%
Lower AP growth vs. GPRO's 289.94%, indicating prompt payments. David Dodd would confirm no lost opportunity in interest-free credit if expansions are underfunded.
-68.11%
Both reduce yoy usage, with GPRO at -521.80%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
56.91%
Well above GPRO's 62.32%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
-12.04%
Negative yoy CFO while GPRO is 191.81%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
7.76%
Some CapEx rise while GPRO is negative at -197.05%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
43.31%
Some yoy expansion while GPRO is negative at -50.14%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
-5.07%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
134.45%
We have mild expansions while GPRO is negative at -54.26%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
14.29%
Debt repayment growth of 14.29% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-100.00%
Negative yoy issuance while GPRO is 151.66%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
-21.50%
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.