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.
-7.99%
Negative net income growth while BIDU stands at 15.28%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-5.44%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with BIDU at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
-322.22%
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.
4.60%
Less SBC growth vs. BIDU's 71.87%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
-1.90%
Negative yoy working capital usage while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-165.98%
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.
800.00%
Inventory growth of 800.00% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
324.53%
AP growth of 324.53% 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.
-41.72%
Negative yoy usage while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
97.63%
Some yoy increase while BIDU is negative at -647.16%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
8.03%
Some CFO growth while BIDU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-42.09%
Negative yoy CapEx while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-88.70%
Negative yoy acquisition while BIDU stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
38.87%
Purchases growth of 38.87% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-35.39%
We reduce yoy sales while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-235.32%
We reduce yoy other investing while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-52.98%
We reduce yoy invests while BIDU stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
6.22%
Debt repayment well below BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry suspects heavier leverage risk or insufficient cash generation to keep pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.