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.
15.93%
Net income growth at 50-75% of BIDU's 21.49%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging competitiveness unless expansions are planned.
8.68%
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.
-112.08%
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.
0.60%
Less SBC growth vs. BIDU's 29.73%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
831.98%
Slight usage while BIDU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-202.08%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with BIDU at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
164.55%
Inventory growth of 164.55% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
117.84%
AP growth of 117.84% 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.
382.35%
Some yoy usage while BIDU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-88.08%
Both negative yoy, with BIDU at -701.02%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
19.09%
Some CFO growth while BIDU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
12.56%
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.
-11.76%
Negative yoy acquisition while BIDU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-19.85%
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.
15.98%
Liquidation growth of 15.98% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
58.75%
Growth well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-14.86%
We reduce yoy invests while BIDU stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-17266.67%
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.
23.98%
Buyback growth of 23.98% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.