Apple Inc. (AAPL)

Positive revenue growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.

Positive gross profit growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.

Positive EBIT growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.

Positive operating income growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.

Positive net income growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.

Positive EPS growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.

Positive diluted EPS growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.

Share reduction while GPRO is at 2.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.

Reduced diluted shares while GPRO is at 2.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.

Dividend growth of 1.97% while GPRO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.

Positive OCF growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.

Positive FCF growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.

Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.

5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 6.10%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.

Positive 3Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.

Positive long-term OCF/share growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.

Positive 10Y CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.

5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GPRO's 30.65%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.

Positive short-term CAGR while GPRO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.

Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.

Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.

Positive short-term equity growth while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.

Dividend/share CAGR of 113.34% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.

Dividend/share CAGR of 27.59% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.

3Y dividend/share CAGR of 12.30% while GPRO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.

Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.

Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.

Positive BV/share change while GPRO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.

We’re deleveraging while GPRO stands at 19.64%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.

We increase R&D while GPRO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.

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.