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.
5.50%
Revenue growth under 50% of GPRO's 13.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
5.47%
Gross profit growth under 50% of GPRO's 26.68%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-4.00%
Negative EBIT growth while GPRO is at 69.10%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-4.00%
Negative operating income growth while GPRO is at 69.02%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
32.61%
Net income growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 64.84%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
31.82%
EPS growth under 50% of GPRO's 66.67%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
27.27%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of GPRO's 66.67%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
2.65%
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.
3.80%
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.
245.90%
OCF growth above 1.5x GPRO's 115.30%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
565.38%
FCF growth above 1.5x GPRO's 114.15%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-40.62%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-0.69%
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.
26.98%
Positive 3Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-5.81%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
84.20%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of GPRO's 118.82%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
694.63%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-71.98%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-76.92%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while GPRO is 69.69%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-7.00%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
35.86%
Positive growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
24.47%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
15.99%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
7.52%
AR growth well above GPRO's 8.86%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
14.29%
We show growth while GPRO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
7.25%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.41%
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.
1.63%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. GPRO's 3.20%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
2.61%
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.
