PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
238.00 - 242.07
140.53 - 242.25
26.77M / 38.44M (Avg.)
25.64 | 9.39
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.
39.32%
Net income growth at 75-90% of BIDU's 48.63%. Bill Ackman would call for strategic or operational tweaks to match competitor’s earnings growth.
13.47%
D&A growth of 13.47% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-39.45%
Negative yoy deferred tax while BIDU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
0.69%
SBC growth while BIDU is negative at -30.78%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-125.42%
Negative yoy working capital usage while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-213.26%
AR is negative yoy while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
23000.00%
Inventory growth of 23000.00% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
85.19%
AP growth of 85.19% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
-509.09%
Negative yoy usage while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-16.67%
Both negative yoy, with BIDU at -318.75%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
10.94%
Some CFO growth while BIDU is negative at -354.71%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-3.03%
Both yoy lines negative, with BIDU at -24.30%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-383.11%
Negative yoy acquisition while BIDU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-81.57%
Negative yoy purchasing while BIDU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
93.37%
Liquidation growth of 93.37% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
118.63%
Growth well above BIDU's 151.30%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-49.60%
We reduce yoy invests while BIDU stands at 78.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-99.96%
We cut debt repayment yoy while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.