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.
-14.49%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-16.80%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-22.95%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-22.95%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-21.31%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-20.34%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-20.69%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.10%
Share reduction while GPRO is at 1.99%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.06%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
12.54%
Dividend growth of 12.54% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-21.45%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-22.32%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1303.27%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 165.70%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
252.10%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 165.70%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
62.06%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of GPRO's 165.70%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
3061.99%
OCF/share CAGR of 3061.99% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
247.90%
OCF/share CAGR of 247.90% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
68.31%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 68.31% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
3232.86%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 477.91% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
265.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of GPRO's 477.91%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
38.45%
Below 50% of GPRO's 477.91%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
1734.71%
Equity/share CAGR of 1734.71% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
224.87%
Equity/share CAGR of 224.87% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
28.69%
Equity/share CAGR of 28.69% 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.
-4.91%
Firm’s AR is declining while GPRO shows 1.78%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-14.77%
Inventory is declining while GPRO stands at 32.04%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.58%
Asset growth at 50-75% of GPRO's 8.79%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
-1.49%
We have a declining book value while GPRO shows 4.02%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
24.04%
Debt growth of 24.04% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
6.05%
R&D dropping or stable vs. GPRO's 15.26%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.01%
SG&A growth well above GPRO's 2.09%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.
