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.
1.80%
Net income growth under 50% of BIDU's 8629.27%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
8.94%
D&A growth of 8.94% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-437.71%
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.
5.99%
Less SBC growth vs. BIDU's 23.89%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
178.67%
Working capital change of 178.67% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
-103.07%
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.
130.26%
Inventory growth of 130.26% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
117.49%
AP growth of 117.49% 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.
529.81%
Growth of 529.81% 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.
-233.76%
Negative yoy while BIDU is 113.82%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
22.20%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of BIDU's 272.74%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
10.22%
Some CapEx rise while BIDU is negative at -56.70%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
13.16%
Acquisition growth of 13.16% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
28.45%
Purchases growth of 28.45% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-42.30%
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.
-71.12%
We reduce yoy other investing while BIDU is 39.26%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-357.39%
We reduce yoy invests while BIDU stands at 39.26%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
98.20%
Debt repayment growth of 98.20% 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.
19.35%
Buyback growth of 19.35% 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.