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.
-18.99%
Negative revenue growth while GPRO stands at 8.51%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-20.34%
Negative gross profit growth while GPRO is at 12.62%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-26.73%
Negative EBIT growth while GPRO is at 88.72%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-26.73%
Negative operating income growth while GPRO is at 88.72%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-27.73%
Negative net income growth while GPRO stands at 78.35%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-25.00%
Negative EPS growth while GPRO is at 78.41%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-25.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while GPRO is at 78.29%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-2.24%
Share reduction while GPRO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.30%
Reduced diluted shares while GPRO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
15.43%
Dividend growth of 15.43% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-37.40%
Negative OCF growth while GPRO is at 168.05%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-43.05%
Negative FCF growth while GPRO is at 145.84%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
1695.90%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 54.48%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
355.28%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 54.48%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
123.41%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 54.48%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
76762.41%
OCF/share CAGR of 76762.41% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
470.08%
OCF/share CAGR of 470.08% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
61.91%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 61.91% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
28426.51%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 73.19% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
519.22%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 73.19%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
110.63%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 73.19%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
2208.15%
Equity/share CAGR of 2208.15% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
504.78%
Equity/share CAGR of 504.78% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
184.13%
Equity/share CAGR of 184.13% 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.
24.77%
AR growth of 24.77% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
36.31%
Inventory growth of 36.31% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
2.63%
Asset growth of 2.63% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
-6.87%
We have a declining book value while GPRO shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.27%
R&D dropping or stable vs. GPRO's 17.38%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-1.01%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
