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.
-5.43%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 64.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
6.35%
Some D&A expansion while GPRO is negative at -1.16%. 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.
-1.80%
Both cut yoy SBC, with GPRO at -4.73%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
365.24%
Well above GPRO's 147.14% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-211.14%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -171.20%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-43.23%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with GPRO at -51.71%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
51.15%
Lower AP growth vs. GPRO's 111.39%, indicating prompt payments. David Dodd would confirm no lost opportunity in interest-free credit if expansions are underfunded.
454.53%
Growth well above GPRO's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-8950.00%
Both negative yoy, with GPRO at -92.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
16.35%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of GPRO's 115.30%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-12.73%
Negative yoy CapEx while GPRO is 63.37%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.50%
Purchases growth of 18.50% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
13.67%
Liquidation growth of 13.67% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-962.50%
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.
73.91%
Investing outflow well above GPRO's 63.37%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-198.16%
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.
18.62%
Buyback growth of 18.62% 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.