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.
8.54%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 13.65%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
7.85%
Gross profit growth under 50% of GPRO's 26.68%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
6.22%
EBIT growth below 50% of GPRO's 69.10%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
6.22%
Operating income growth under 50% of GPRO's 69.02%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
10.00%
Net income growth under 50% of GPRO's 64.84%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
9.37%
EPS growth under 50% of GPRO's 66.67%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
9.09%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of GPRO's 66.67%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.86%
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.
0.44%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x GPRO's 0.90%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-11.94%
Negative OCF growth while GPRO is at 115.30%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-17.04%
Negative FCF growth while GPRO is at 114.15%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-17.35%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
53.83%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 6.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
115.39%
Positive 3Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1197.60%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
60.87%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of GPRO's 118.82%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
1215.49%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
87.25%
Positive 10Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
27.21%
Below 50% of GPRO's 69.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
771.70%
Positive short-term CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
45.83%
Positive growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
30.27%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
46.69%
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.
-6.87%
Firm’s AR is declining while GPRO shows 8.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
17.68%
We show growth while GPRO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
3.73%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.90%
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.
21.85%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. GPRO's 3.20%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
5.59%
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.
