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.
75.37%
Revenue growth above 1.5x GPRO's 13.65%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
58.07%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x GPRO's 26.68%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
113.16%
EBIT growth above 1.5x GPRO's 69.10%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
113.16%
Operating income growth above 1.5x GPRO's 69.02%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
64.86%
Net income growth comparable to GPRO's 64.84%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
60.32%
EPS growth similar to GPRO's 66.67%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
64.29%
Similar diluted EPS growth to GPRO's 66.67%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
2.63%
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.
0.99%
Diluted share count expanding well above GPRO's 0.90%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
71.10%
OCF growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 115.30%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
65.84%
FCF growth 50-75% of GPRO's 114.15%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
26.65%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-37.53%
Negative 5Y CAGR while GPRO stands at 6.97%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-14.90%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
15.32%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-37.83%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while GPRO is at 118.82%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
213.53%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
18.37%
Positive 10Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-26.50%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while GPRO is 69.69%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
222.00%
Positive short-term CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
133.84%
Positive growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
30.09%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
75.77%
Positive short-term equity growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
30.98%
AR growth well above GPRO's 8.86%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-25.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
46.99%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
38.56%
Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
9.76%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. GPRO's 3.20%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
35.74%
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.
