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.
6.84%
Net income growth under 50% of BIDU's 48.63%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
1.59%
D&A growth of 1.59% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
293.44%
Deferred tax of 293.44% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
3.73%
SBC growth while BIDU is negative at -30.78%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-289.45%
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.
133.11%
AR growth of 133.11% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
-291.52%
Negative yoy inventory while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
482.76%
AP growth of 482.76% 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.
-66.24%
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.
-209.09%
Both negative yoy, with BIDU at -318.75%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-5.86%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with BIDU at -354.71%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
36.17%
Some CapEx rise while BIDU is negative at -24.30%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
83.27%
Acquisition growth of 83.27% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
51.29%
Purchases growth of 51.29% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
8.46%
Liquidation growth of 8.46% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
123.38%
Growth well above BIDU's 151.30%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
278.79%
Investing outflow well above BIDU's 78.62%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
10.59%
Debt repayment growth of 10.59% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-335.00%
We cut yoy buybacks while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.