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.
-0.23%
Negative revenue growth while BIDU stands at 1.82%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-1.85%
Negative gross profit growth while BIDU is at 2.21%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-15.72%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-15.72%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-11.55%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-10.90%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-10.80%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.75%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.70%
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.
6.38%
Positive OCF growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
13.25%
Positive FCF growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
2515.65%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 668.08%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
323.62%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 74.65%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
115.61%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 13.73%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
2045.23%
OCF/share CAGR of 2045.23% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
303.30%
OCF/share CAGR of 303.30% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
91.78%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
3383.84%
Positive 10Y CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
259.26%
Positive 5Y CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
82.59%
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.
152.30%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with BIDU's 139.18%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
69.35%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 33.00%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
3.33%
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.
-0.60%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-2.79%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
5.27%
Debt growth far above BIDU's 8.50%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
3.61%
We increase R&D while BIDU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
24.64%
SG&A growth well above BIDU's 28.26%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.