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.
42.11%
Revenue growth above 1.5x GPRO's 13.65%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
1933.33%
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.
96.90%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x GPRO's 69.10%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
96.90%
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.
120.77%
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.
120.00%
EPS growth above 1.5x GPRO's 66.67%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
120.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x GPRO's 66.67%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
2.64%
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.
4.64%
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.
-238.46%
Negative OCF growth while GPRO is at 115.30%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-74.29%
Negative FCF growth while GPRO is at 114.15%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-37.17%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-53.20%
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.
-22.32%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-70.53%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
91.31%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of GPRO's 118.82%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
-121.65%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-76.99%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
104.15%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x GPRO's 69.69%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
-40.37%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
44.52%
Positive growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
29.93%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
105.39%
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.
44.44%
AR growth well above GPRO's 8.86%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-52.38%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
2.41%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-1.89%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
1.93%
We have some new debt while GPRO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-0.98%
Our R&D shrinks while GPRO invests at 3.20%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.68%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
