PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
743.76 - 757.57
479.80 - 796.25
8.25M / 11.73M (Avg.)
27.40 | 27.58
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
10.57%
Revenue growth under 50% of BIDU's 24.23%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
9.74%
Gross profit growth under 50% of BIDU's 26.86%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
7.60%
EBIT growth below 50% of BIDU's 18.70%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
7.60%
Operating income growth under 50% of BIDU's 18.70%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
2.39%
Positive net income growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2.33%
Positive EPS growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
2.96%
Positive diluted EPS growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.49%
Share reduction while BIDU is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.36%
Reduced diluted shares while BIDU is at 0.34%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-19.86%
Negative OCF growth while BIDU is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-43.74%
Negative FCF growth while BIDU is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
1139.17%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of BIDU's 3069.29%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
519.44%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 243.73%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
216.63%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 57.54%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
3993.01%
OCF/share CAGR of 3993.01% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
304.43%
Positive OCF/share growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
224.09%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 224.09% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
1683.32%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of BIDU's 2265.08%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
1209.36%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 142.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
590.77%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 75.76%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
445.63%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x BIDU's 377.44%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
94.63%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of BIDU's 149.20%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
9.29%
AR growth well above BIDU's 8.93%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.51%
Asset growth well under 50% of BIDU's 7.00%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.77%
Under 50% of BIDU's 16.21%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
23.47%
Debt growth far above BIDU's 7.35%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
12.73%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. BIDU's 22.43%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
11.86%
SG&A declining or stable vs. BIDU's 43.38%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.