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.
-9.26%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 82.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
0.49%
Less D&A growth vs. GPRO's 17.19%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-3.21%
Both cut yoy SBC, with GPRO at -5.38%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
102.52%
Slight usage while GPRO is negative at -21.76%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-187.88%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -167.01%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-106.32%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with GPRO at -270.77%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
112.65%
Lower AP growth vs. GPRO's 356.29%, indicating prompt payments. David Dodd would confirm no lost opportunity in interest-free credit if expansions are underfunded.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
257.43%
Some yoy increase while GPRO is negative at -21.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
27.18%
Some CFO growth while GPRO is negative at -470.91%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-7.77%
Both yoy lines negative, with GPRO at -171.37%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.61%
Purchases growth of 14.61% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-11.21%
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.
12.81%
Growth of 12.81% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
59.03%
We have mild expansions while GPRO is negative at -171.37%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-3.34%
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.
-14.29%
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.