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.
4.54%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of BIDU's 6.66%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
6.76%
Gross profit growth under 50% of BIDU's 14.61%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
8.44%
EBIT growth below 50% of BIDU's 910.73%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.44%
Operating income growth under 50% of BIDU's 910.73%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
132.84%
Positive net income growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
131.52%
Positive EPS growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
132.97%
Positive diluted EPS growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.06%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.03%
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.
8.03%
OCF growth under 50% of BIDU's 26.36%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
15.92%
FCF growth under 50% of BIDU's 56.99%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
1481.69%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of BIDU's 2086.26%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
404.64%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 109.35%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
156.16%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 53.33%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
1308.11%
OCF/share CAGR of 1308.11% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
582.88%
OCF/share CAGR of 582.88% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
164.73%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 164.73% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
2193.71%
Positive 10Y CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
595.44%
Positive 5Y CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
136.53%
Positive short-term CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
305.28%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x BIDU's 228.71%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
76.73%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to BIDU's 78.54%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
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.
2.13%
Our AR growth while BIDU is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.33%
Positive asset growth while BIDU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.96%
Positive BV/share change while BIDU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
16.93%
Debt growth far above BIDU's 3.41%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
7.03%
We increase R&D while BIDU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-33.24%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.