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.
51.57%
Revenue growth above 1.5x GPRO's 8.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
46.24%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x GPRO's 5.97%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
57.26%
EBIT growth 75-90% of GPRO's 69.80%. Bill Ackman would push for cost reforms or better product mix to narrow the gap.
57.26%
Operating income growth at 75-90% of GPRO's 69.80%. Bill Ackman would demand a plan to enhance operating leverage.
59.04%
Net income growth under 50% of GPRO's 354.05%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
61.29%
EPS growth under 50% of GPRO's 261.54%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
58.06%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of GPRO's 250.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.06%
Share reduction more than 1.5x GPRO's 59.03%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.10%
Reduced diluted shares while GPRO is at 74.96%. 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.
156.41%
OCF growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 217.16%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
272.16%
FCF growth above 1.5x GPRO's 175.33%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
2732.38%
10Y CAGR of 2732.38% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
429.26%
5Y CAGR of 429.26% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
234.49%
3Y CAGR of 234.49% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
16188.16%
OCF/share CAGR of 16188.16% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
684.10%
OCF/share CAGR of 684.10% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
289.96%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 289.96% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
166808.11%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 166808.11% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
671.64%
Net income/share CAGR of 671.64% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
272.57%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 272.57% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
2266.34%
Equity/share CAGR of 2266.34% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
606.94%
Equity/share CAGR of 606.94% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
242.62%
Equity/share CAGR of 242.62% 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.
6.11%
Our AR growth while GPRO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
83.94%
We show growth while GPRO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
11.37%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
7.66%
Under 50% of GPRO's 100.00%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
11.48%
We increase R&D while GPRO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
11.33%
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.
