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.
-90.32%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with JMIA at -12.39%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
24.31%
Some D&A expansion while JMIA is negative at -5.20%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-308.12%
Negative yoy deferred tax while JMIA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
0.90%
Less SBC growth vs. JMIA's 57.32%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
300.34%
Slight usage while JMIA is negative at -6.71%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-83.31%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with JMIA at -353.35%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
334.43%
Some inventory rise while JMIA is negative at -81.75%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
903.59%
AP growth well above JMIA's 136.27%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
18376.47%
Some yoy usage while JMIA is negative at -13099900.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
399.83%
Well above JMIA's 105.41%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
155.81%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x JMIA's 2.02%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-1.31%
Negative yoy CapEx while JMIA is 8.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
6.10%
Less M&A spending yoy vs. JMIA's 700.00%, reducing near-term risk. David Dodd would confirm the firm is not missing out on a strategic deal that competitor might exploit.
2.51%
Purchases growth of 2.51% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
920.29%
Liquidation growth of 920.29% while JMIA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-13.84%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -75.30%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
30.67%
We have mild expansions while JMIA is negative at -77.14%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-275.25%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -62.96%. 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.