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.
13.16%
Revenue growth similar to GPRO's 13.65%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
4.33%
Gross profit growth under 50% of GPRO's 26.68%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
82.98%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x GPRO's 69.10%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
82.98%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x GPRO's 69.02%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
65.31%
Net income growth comparable to GPRO's 64.84%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
65.28%
EPS growth similar to GPRO's 66.67%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
65.28%
Similar diluted EPS growth to GPRO's 66.67%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.05%
Share reduction more than 1.5x GPRO's 0.90%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.27%
Reduced diluted shares while GPRO is at 0.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.27%
Dividend growth of 0.27% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
273.49%
OCF growth above 1.5x GPRO's 115.30%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
251.35%
FCF growth above 1.5x GPRO's 114.15%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
282.07%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
98.88%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 6.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
43.72%
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.
-67.61%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
38.72%
Positive short-term CAGR while GPRO 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
60.75%
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.
9.19%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 9.19% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
10.26%
AR growth well above GPRO's 8.86%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
2.84%
We show growth while GPRO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
6.41%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.31%
Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
3.31%
We have some new debt while GPRO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-8.55%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
