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.
9.62%
Net income growth under 50% of BIDU's 49.51%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
4.84%
Some D&A expansion while BIDU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-411.27%
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.
-5.90%
Negative yoy SBC while BIDU is 21.87%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
55.92%
Well above BIDU's 100.00% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-209.89%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with BIDU at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
223.33%
Inventory growth of 223.33% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-1458.33%
Negative yoy AP while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
64.71%
Growth well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-39.29%
Both negative yoy, with BIDU at -346.01%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
5.56%
Some CFO growth while BIDU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
14.08%
Lower CapEx growth vs. BIDU's 100.00%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
-21.88%
Negative yoy acquisition while BIDU stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-53.63%
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.
66.65%
Liquidation growth of 66.65% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
192.50%
Growth well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
30.13%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. BIDU's 100.00%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
-2.66%
We cut debt repayment yoy while BIDU is 100.00%. 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.