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.
106.82%
Net income growth above 1.5x JMIA's 2.78%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
7.20%
D&A growth well above JMIA's 3.26%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
44.41%
Lower deferred tax growth vs. JMIA's 1146.60%, implying fewer future tax liabilities. David Dodd would confirm there’s no short-term tax shock instead.
48.04%
SBC growth while JMIA is negative at -53.98%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
193.27%
Well above JMIA's 332.23% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-326.15%
AR is negative yoy while JMIA is 300.03%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-148.28%
Negative yoy inventory while JMIA is 99.60%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
207.11%
AP growth of 207.11% 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.
190.34%
Growth well above JMIA's 368.25%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-177.06%
Negative yoy while JMIA is 449.87%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
572.52%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x JMIA's 67.79%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-9.77%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -8.93%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-29.67%
Negative yoy acquisition while JMIA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-28.05%
Negative yoy purchasing while JMIA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-30.00%
Both yoy lines are negative, with JMIA at -100.00%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-38.26%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -58.68%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
-100.18%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -101.06%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-50.52%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -2.16%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting net new borrowings or weaker paydowns across the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.