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.
-14.54%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with BIDU at -91.96%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
-2.35%
Negative yoy D&A while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
6.98%
Deferred tax of 6.98% 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.
4.04%
SBC growth while BIDU is negative at -9.37%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
90.94%
Working capital change of 90.94% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
146.53%
AR growth of 146.53% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
-252.34%
Negative yoy inventory while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-172.51%
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.
124.62%
Growth of 124.62% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a difference in minor WC usage that might affect short-term cash flow if large.
111.04%
Well above BIDU's 98.60%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
19.38%
CFO growth of 19.38% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a modest edge that could widen if cost discipline remains strong.
-15.62%
Negative yoy CapEx while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-525.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while BIDU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-13.26%
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.
9.34%
Liquidation growth of 9.34% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
69.33%
Growth of 69.33% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-13.81%
We reduce yoy invests while BIDU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
99.82%
Debt repayment growth of 99.82% 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.
-17.87%
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.