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.
241.62%
Net income growth above 1.5x JMIA's 36.30%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
6.36%
D&A growth well above JMIA's 10.12%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
57.80%
Deferred tax of 57.80% 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.
6.66%
SBC growth while JMIA is negative at -171.91%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
34.98%
Slight usage while JMIA is negative at -2949.88%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
29.49%
AR growth is negative or stable vs. JMIA's 175.57%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd would confirm it doesn't hamper sales volume.
118.82%
Inventory growth well above JMIA's 234.18%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
-133.14%
Both negative yoy AP, with JMIA at -316.51%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
103.12%
Some yoy usage while JMIA is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-118.45%
Negative yoy while JMIA is 826.69%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
27.21%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x JMIA's 7.89%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-4.16%
Negative yoy CapEx while JMIA is 18.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-241.70%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -50.00%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
27.36%
Some yoy expansion while JMIA is negative at -100.00%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
-78.64%
We reduce yoy sales while JMIA is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-17.77%
We reduce yoy other investing while JMIA is 251.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-29.23%
We reduce yoy invests while JMIA stands at 286.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
86.87%
Debt repayment 1.25-1.5x JMIA's 59.23%. Bruce Berkowitz would see an edge in lowering interest burdens unless competitor invests in profitable expansions.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
100.00%
Buyback growth of 100.00% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.