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.
146.54%
Some net income increase while GPRO is negative at -25.59%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
5.81%
Some D&A expansion while GPRO is negative at -3.48%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.98%
SBC growth well above GPRO's 3.29%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
-262.71%
Both reduce yoy usage, with GPRO at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
129.48%
AR growth while GPRO is negative at -80.21%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
119.78%
Some inventory rise while GPRO is negative at -29.26%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
-131.48%
Negative yoy AP while GPRO is 26.66%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-217.09%
Both reduce yoy usage, with GPRO at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
-565.23%
Both negative yoy, with GPRO at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
11.65%
Some CFO growth while GPRO is negative at -127.84%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-1.10%
Both yoy lines negative, with GPRO at -213.70%. 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.
42.13%
Purchases growth of 42.13% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
28.65%
Liquidation growth of 28.65% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-215.71%
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.
577.65%
We have mild expansions while GPRO is negative at -213.70%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-410.56%
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.
5.89%
Buyback growth of 5.89% 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.