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.
67.92%
Positive revenue growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
70.15%
Positive gross profit growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
100.26%
Positive EBIT growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
100.26%
Positive operating income growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
87.28%
Positive net income growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
88.46%
Positive EPS growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
86.54%
Positive diluted EPS growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.71%
Share reduction while GPRO is at 0.72%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.50%
Reduced diluted shares while GPRO is at 0.71%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
2.84%
Dividend growth of 2.84% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
80.72%
Positive OCF growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
118.63%
Positive FCF growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
1001.95%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
108.21%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
35.26%
Positive 3Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1117.33%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
55.25%
Positive OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-4.12%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
1421.86%
Positive 10Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
97.22%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
27.22%
Positive short-term CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
900.46%
Below 50% of GPRO's 6850.42%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
41.52%
Below 50% of GPRO's 6850.42%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
29.92%
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.
72.17%
Dividend/share CAGR of 72.17% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
36.23%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 36.23% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
42.68%
Our AR growth while GPRO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-8.94%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
8.39%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.34%
Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
5.81%
Debt growth far above GPRO's 1.65%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
13.68%
We increase R&D while GPRO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
10.93%
We expand SG&A while GPRO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.
