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.
28.78%
Revenue growth above 1.5x GPRO's 13.65%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
28.95%
Gross profit growth similar to GPRO's 26.68%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
47.43%
EBIT growth 50-75% of GPRO's 69.10%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
47.43%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 69.02%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
41.29%
Net income growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 64.84%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
41.14%
EPS growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 66.67%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
41.96%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 66.67%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
0.23%
Share reduction more than 1.5x GPRO's 0.90%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.44%
Reduced diluted shares while GPRO is at 0.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-8.31%
Negative OCF growth while GPRO is at 115.30%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-7.44%
Negative FCF growth while GPRO is at 114.15%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
261.82%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
313.21%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 6.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
65.24%
Positive 3Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
974.64%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
1366.02%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 118.82%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
1200.18%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
542.57%
Positive 10Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
1977.02%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 69.69%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
165.43%
Positive short-term CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
624.97%
Positive growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
331.35%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
155.43%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-27.44%
Firm’s AR is declining while GPRO shows 8.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-22.20%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
18.29%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.51%
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.
5.70%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. GPRO's 3.20%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
9.21%
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.
