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.
-20.01%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-22.37%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-27.03%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-27.03%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-27.00%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-28.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-26.53%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.08%
Share change of 0.08% while GPRO is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
-0.12%
Reduced diluted shares while GPRO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.16%
Dividend reduction while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-46.62%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-51.34%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
2168.25%
10Y CAGR of 2168.25% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
443.33%
5Y CAGR of 443.33% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
211.98%
3Y CAGR of 211.98% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
9690.16%
OCF/share CAGR of 9690.16% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
881.09%
OCF/share CAGR of 881.09% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
418.33%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 418.33% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
52224.57%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 52224.57% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
755.17%
Net income/share CAGR of 755.17% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
199.97%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 199.97% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
2411.76%
Equity/share CAGR of 2411.76% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
602.52%
Equity/share CAGR of 602.52% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
232.58%
Equity/share CAGR of 232.58% 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.
-38.92%
Firm’s AR is declining while GPRO shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-14.43%
Inventory is declining while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.69%
Negative asset growth while GPRO invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
6.31%
BV/share growth of 6.31% 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.
10.79%
R&D dropping or stable vs. GPRO's 38.92%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-5.92%
We cut SG&A while GPRO invests at 8.08%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.
