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.
47.32%
Positive revenue growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
48.06%
Positive gross profit growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
65.29%
Positive EBIT growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
65.29%
Positive operating income growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
65.06%
Positive net income growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
69.39%
Positive EPS growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
67.35%
Positive diluted EPS growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.56%
Share reduction while GPRO is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.56%
Reduced diluted shares while GPRO is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
1.75%
Dividend growth of 1.75% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
103.81%
Positive OCF growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
138.94%
Positive FCF growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
1280.65%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
228.45%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
64.56%
Positive 3Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
10052.08%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
225.30%
Positive OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
38.61%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
3299.71%
Positive 10Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
254.01%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
65.99%
Positive short-term CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
1501.27%
Below 50% of GPRO's 21373.29%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
171.62%
Below 50% of GPRO's 21373.29%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
19.09%
Below 50% of GPRO's 21373.29%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
40.81%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 40.81% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-23.12%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
4.34%
We show growth while GPRO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.01%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
9.17%
Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.12%
We’re deleveraging while GPRO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
8.29%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. GPRO's 15.88%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
3.86%
SG&A growth well above GPRO's 0.77%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.
