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.
-12.23%
Negative net income growth while JMIA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
4.95%
D&A growth of 4.95% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
145.78%
Deferred tax of 145.78% 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.
0.25%
SBC growth of 0.25% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see some additional share issuance that must be justified by expansions or retention needs.
-236.55%
Negative yoy working capital usage while JMIA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
137.00%
AR growth of 137.00% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
198.45%
Inventory growth of 198.45% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-214.70%
Negative yoy AP while JMIA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-160.04%
Negative yoy usage while JMIA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-350.98%
Negative yoy while JMIA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-114.51%
Negative yoy CFO while JMIA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
14.40%
CapEx growth of 14.40% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost burden that must yield returns in future revenue or margins.
83.95%
Acquisition growth of 83.95% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
81.04%
Purchases growth of 81.04% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-24.89%
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.
-36.36%
We reduce yoy other investing while JMIA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
73.77%
We expand invests by 73.77% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate outflow that must be justified by returns vs. competitor’s stable approach.
15.47%
Debt repayment growth of 15.47% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.