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.
15.97%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x GPRO's 13.65%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
18.30%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 26.68%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
1834.39%
EBIT growth above 1.5x GPRO's 69.10%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
1834.39%
Operating income growth above 1.5x GPRO's 69.02%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
-16.92%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 64.84%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-18.27%
Negative EPS growth while GPRO is at 66.67%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-18.27%
Negative diluted EPS growth while GPRO is at 66.67%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
1.11%
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.
1.11%
Diluted share count expanding well above GPRO's 0.90%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
0.91%
Dividend growth of 0.91% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
70.45%
OCF growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 115.30%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
74.98%
FCF growth 50-75% of GPRO's 114.15%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
526.38%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
89.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 6.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
69.50%
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.
347.59%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
44.66%
Positive short-term CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
345.55%
Positive growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
68.52%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
38.19%
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.
3.79%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 3.79% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
23.80%
AR growth well above GPRO's 8.86%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-9.11%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
3.51%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.97%
Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-27.23%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
4.93%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. GPRO's 3.20%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
4.05%
We expand SG&A while GPRO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.
