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.
30.51%
Net income growth above 1.5x JMIA's 0.80%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
16.28%
D&A growth well above JMIA's 25.94%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-22.10%
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.
-6.34%
Negative yoy SBC while JMIA is 7.67%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
206.38%
Slight usage while JMIA is negative at -31.50%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-473.89%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with JMIA at -514.16%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
161.90%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. JMIA's 407.32%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
1929.35%
AP growth of 1929.35% 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.
136.69%
Some yoy usage while JMIA is negative at -12.12%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-244.68%
Negative yoy while JMIA is 81.88%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
75.72%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x JMIA's 1.26%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-23.05%
Both yoy lines negative, with JMIA at -116.32%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-307.56%
Negative yoy acquisition while JMIA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-308.51%
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.
-54.43%
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.
32.79%
Less 'other investing' outflow yoy vs. JMIA's 104.30%. David Dodd would see a stronger short-term cash position unless competitor invests more wisely.
-121.57%
We reduce yoy invests while JMIA stands at 98.02%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
71.83%
We repay more while JMIA is negative at -30.34%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.