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.
2.69%
Revenue growth under 50% of GPRO's 185.21%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-3.95%
Negative gross profit growth while GPRO is at 137.88%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-5.44%
Negative EBIT growth while GPRO is at 383.23%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-5.44%
Negative operating income growth while GPRO is at 383.23%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-6.81%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-8.82%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-6.06%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.19%
Slight or no buybacks while GPRO is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.12%
Slight or no buyback while GPRO is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-10.33%
Negative OCF growth while GPRO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-22.02%
Negative FCF growth while GPRO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
1805.51%
10Y CAGR of 1805.51% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
436.92%
5Y CAGR of 436.92% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
248.74%
3Y CAGR of 248.74% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
8417.80%
OCF/share CAGR of 8417.80% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
399.95%
OCF/share CAGR of 399.95% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
181.14%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 181.14% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
14070.21%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 14070.21% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
744.23%
Net income/share CAGR of 744.23% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
372.66%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 372.66% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
2106.91%
Equity/share CAGR of 2106.91% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
654.96%
Equity/share CAGR of 654.96% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
257.56%
Equity/share CAGR of 257.56% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
42.75%
AR growth of 42.75% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-29.50%
Inventory is declining while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
8.08%
Asset growth of 8.08% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
5.59%
BV/share growth of 5.59% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.42%
R&D dropping or stable vs. GPRO's 12.45%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
0.24%
SG&A declining or stable vs. GPRO's 62.50%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.
