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.
-22.26%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 597.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
2.48%
Some D&A expansion while GPRO is negative at -9.68%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
310.84%
Lower deferred tax growth vs. GPRO's 802.25%, implying fewer future tax liabilities. David Dodd would confirm there’s no short-term tax shock instead.
-0.40%
Both cut yoy SBC, with GPRO at -8.90%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-57.16%
Negative yoy working capital usage while GPRO is 277.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-110.35%
AR is negative yoy while GPRO is 120.56%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-104.17%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with GPRO at -314.26%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
79.79%
AP growth well above GPRO's 60.64%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-322.42%
Both reduce yoy usage, with GPRO at -375.10%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
78.07%
Well above GPRO's 35.51%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
-18.72%
Negative yoy CFO while GPRO is 216.86%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
16.39%
Some CapEx rise while GPRO is negative at -146.90%. 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.
69.75%
Some yoy expansion while GPRO is negative at -136.40%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
-26.78%
Both yoy lines are negative, with GPRO at -9.64%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-70.91%
Both yoy lines negative, with GPRO at -148.08%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
145.70%
We have mild expansions while GPRO is negative at -157.40%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-71.33%
We cut debt repayment yoy while GPRO is 100.00%. 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.
3.38%
Buyback growth below 50% of GPRO's 16.20%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.