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.
68.51%
Some net income increase while GPRO is negative at -89.20%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
-9.77%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with GPRO at -2.58%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
116.89%
Well above GPRO's 180.99% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
16.45%
SBC growth while GPRO is negative at -5.63%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
464.53%
Slight usage while GPRO is negative at -200.28%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
55.34%
AR growth is negative or stable vs. GPRO's 379.43%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd would confirm it doesn't hamper sales volume.
147.66%
Some inventory rise while GPRO is negative at -195.66%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
40.40%
A yoy AP increase while GPRO is negative at -284.99%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
845.16%
Growth well above GPRO's 44.04%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-69.19%
Both negative yoy, with GPRO at -51.10%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
132.50%
Some CFO growth while GPRO is negative at -144.80%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
13.03%
Lower CapEx growth vs. GPRO's 26.24%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
100.00%
Acquisition spending well above GPRO's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier integration risk or short-term free cash flow drain vs. competitor.
-123.27%
Negative yoy purchasing while GPRO stands at 64.03%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
8.59%
Below 50% of GPRO's 90.62%. Michael Burry would see minimal near-term inflows vs. competitor’s liquidation approach.
29.43%
We have some outflow growth while GPRO is negative at -121.92%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
-2028.86%
We reduce yoy invests while GPRO stands at 86.34%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
80.84%
Debt repayment at 75-90% of GPRO's 100.00%. Bill Ackman urges more debt clearance to match competitor’s lower leverage.
-100.00%
Negative yoy issuance while GPRO is 880.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
-3.70%
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.