PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
226.29 - 230.79
161.38 - 242.52
38.50M / 42.21M (Avg.)
34.73 | 6.57
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
62.50%
Net income growth above 1.5x JMIA's 1.31%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
-2.82%
Negative yoy D&A while JMIA is 7.78%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
103.59%
Deferred tax of 103.59% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-103.59%
Both cut yoy SBC, with JMIA at -11.86%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
536.90%
Well above JMIA's 157.65% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-222.72%
AR is negative yoy while JMIA is 972.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-246.34%
Negative yoy inventory while JMIA is 137.38%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
280.20%
AP growth of 280.20% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
210.65%
Growth well above JMIA's 91.73%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-138.77%
Both negative yoy, with JMIA at -616.74%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
721.82%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x JMIA's 40.10%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-52.59%
Negative yoy CapEx while JMIA is 15.38%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-27170.05%
Negative yoy acquisition while JMIA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
90.60%
Purchases growth of 90.60% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-76.27%
We reduce yoy sales while JMIA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
27170.05%
Growth well above JMIA's 53.85%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
111.79%
Investing outflow well above JMIA's 55.87%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-20.22%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -54.62%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting net new borrowings or weaker paydowns across the niche.
-85.91%
Negative yoy issuance while JMIA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.