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.
6.08%
Revenue growth under 50% of GPRO's 88.11%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
6.50%
Gross profit growth under 50% of GPRO's 136.68%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
9.01%
EBIT growth below 50% of GPRO's 10602.23%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
9.01%
Operating income growth under 50% of GPRO's 10602.23%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
8.87%
Net income growth under 50% of GPRO's 4071.75%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
11.11%
EPS growth under 50% of GPRO's 4079.59%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
11.11%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of GPRO's 4742.86%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.57%
Share reduction while GPRO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.64%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
0.08%
Dividend growth of 0.08% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
26.57%
OCF growth under 50% of GPRO's 252.03%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
30.80%
FCF growth under 50% of GPRO's 371.09%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
1650.48%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
365.68%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
86.32%
Positive 3Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
10773.69%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 294.87%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
126.34%
Below 50% of GPRO's 294.87%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
76.35%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of GPRO's 294.87%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
13577.81%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 403.26% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
548.80%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x GPRO's 403.26%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
76.38%
Below 50% of GPRO's 403.26%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
2243.86%
Positive growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
443.65%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
161.49%
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.
48.23%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. GPRO's 117.80%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
3.95%
Inventory growth well above GPRO's 7.56%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
3.57%
Asset growth well under 50% of GPRO's 44.22%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.76%
Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.01%
We have some new debt while GPRO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-0.85%
Our R&D shrinks while GPRO invests at 29.94%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1.06%
SG&A declining or stable vs. GPRO's 23.02%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.
