229.02 - 234.51
169.21 - 260.10
55.82M / 54.92M (Avg.)
32.24 | 7.26
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.
-1.41%
Negative revenue growth while GPRO stands at 13.65%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-5.44%
Negative gross profit growth while GPRO is at 26.68%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
236.60%
EBIT growth above 1.5x GPRO's 69.10%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
236.60%
Operating income growth above 1.5x GPRO's 69.02%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
252.92%
Net income growth above 1.5x GPRO's 64.84%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
251.28%
EPS growth above 1.5x GPRO's 66.67%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
251.28%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x GPRO's 66.67%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
2.02%
Share count expansion well above GPRO's 0.90%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
2.02%
Diluted share count expanding well above GPRO's 0.90%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-4.02%
Dividend reduction while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
140.89%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x GPRO's 115.30%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
102.01%
FCF growth 75-90% of GPRO's 114.15%. Bill Ackman might push for improved capital allocation or operational changes to match the competitor.
269.56%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
200.14%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 6.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
28.58%
Positive 3Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
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.
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.
222.43%
Positive growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
158.94%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
75.56%
Positive short-term equity growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
18.26%
AR growth well above GPRO's 8.86%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-8.40%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
1.10%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
3.92%
Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-4.93%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-32.39%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
