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.
3.75%
Revenue growth under 50% of BIDU's 8.59%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
2.65%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x BIDU's 0.18%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-1.40%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1.40%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
0.61%
Net income growth under 50% of BIDU's 93.63%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
1.14%
EPS growth under 50% of BIDU's 93.89%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
1.15%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of BIDU's 94.27%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.58%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.54%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
19.00%
OCF growth of 19.00% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
46.23%
FCF growth of 46.23% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
1113.15%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of BIDU's 2914.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
486.74%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 218.04%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
198.07%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 53.24%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
1018.59%
OCF/share CAGR of 1018.59% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
579.93%
OCF/share CAGR of 579.93% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
234.23%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 234.23% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
1807.97%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of BIDU's 3398.79%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
948.96%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 307.79%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
463.49%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x BIDU's 335.80%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
430.59%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x BIDU's 356.37%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
89.58%
Below 50% of BIDU's 184.22%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
8.37%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. BIDU's 424.22%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.39%
Positive asset growth while BIDU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.80%
Under 50% of BIDU's 7.09%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-42.15%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
5.31%
We increase R&D while BIDU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
9.12%
SG&A declining or stable vs. BIDU's 25.22%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.