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.
0.04%
Net income growth under 50% of GPRO's 106.49%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
-1.22%
Negative yoy D&A while GPRO is 1.95%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
375.83%
Some yoy growth while GPRO is negative at -321.28%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
0.06%
Less SBC growth vs. GPRO's 43.18%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
78.52%
Less working capital growth vs. GPRO's 657.58%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-140.52%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with GPRO at -122.45%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-194.77%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with GPRO at -68.75%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
121.99%
Lower AP growth vs. GPRO's 448.52%, indicating prompt payments. David Dodd would confirm no lost opportunity in interest-free credit if expansions are underfunded.
78.99%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. GPRO's 502.99%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
241.03%
Well above GPRO's 104.00%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
22.24%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of GPRO's 327.59%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
15.54%
Some CapEx rise while GPRO is negative at -75.22%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-92.61%
Negative yoy acquisition while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-3.59%
Negative yoy purchasing while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-32.99%
Both yoy lines are negative, with GPRO at -100.00%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
26.30%
We have some outflow growth while GPRO is negative at -100.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
-157.31%
Both yoy lines negative, with GPRO at -139.09%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
75.39%
Debt repayment growth of 75.39% while GPRO is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-100.00%
Negative yoy issuance while GPRO is 7168.18%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
14.44%
Buyback growth of 14.44% 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.