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.
34.04%
Positive revenue growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
33.00%
Positive gross profit growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
44.84%
Positive EBIT growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
44.84%
Positive operating income growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
41.35%
Positive net income growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
41.89%
Positive EPS growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
43.84%
Positive diluted EPS growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.37%
Share reduction while GPRO is at 1.22%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.53%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
2.48%
Dividend growth of 2.48% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
36.71%
Positive OCF growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
41.58%
Positive FCF growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
989.83%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
93.89%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
30.43%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x GPRO's 27.55%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
790.73%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
55.93%
Positive OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
14.08%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1534.81%
Positive 10Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
102.29%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
27.63%
Below 50% of GPRO's 78.13%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
576.32%
Below 50% of GPRO's 6096.69%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
20.40%
Below 50% of GPRO's 95.72%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
7.89%
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.
70.67%
Dividend/share CAGR of 70.67% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
41.06%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 41.06% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-24.52%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
26.09%
Inventory growth well above GPRO's 2.16%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
2.19%
Positive asset growth while GPRO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
11.56%
Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.22%
Debt shrinking faster vs. GPRO's 62.66%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
4.05%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. GPRO's 1.43%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
13.45%
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.
