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.
61.62%
Net income growth under 50% of BIDU's 282.17%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
2.72%
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.
123.01%
Deferred tax of 123.01% 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.
-5.53%
Both cut yoy SBC, with BIDU at -23.40%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-67.51%
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.
-4401.25%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with BIDU at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
172.57%
Inventory growth of 172.57% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
187.67%
AP growth of 187.67% 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.
-76.40%
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.
-23.06%
Both negative yoy, with BIDU at -227.79%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
21.51%
Some CFO growth while BIDU is negative at -4.91%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-0.28%
Negative yoy CapEx while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
92.12%
Acquisition spending well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier integration risk or short-term free cash flow drain vs. competitor.
-51.63%
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.
31.83%
Liquidation growth of 31.83% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-441.18%
We reduce yoy other investing while BIDU is 19.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-79.89%
We reduce yoy invests while BIDU stands at 19.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-74.29%
We cut debt repayment yoy while BIDU is 0.00%. 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.
-15.25%
We cut yoy buybacks while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.