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.
22.04%
Some net income increase while BIDU is negative at -10.56%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
6.62%
D&A growth of 6.62% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-30.26%
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.
9.27%
Less SBC growth vs. BIDU's 47.08%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
113.84%
Working capital change of 113.84% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
-166.19%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
201.27%
AP growth of 201.27% 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.
334.56%
Growth of 334.56% 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.
29.21%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. BIDU's 345.92%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
21.94%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of BIDU's 82.05%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-9.52%
Both yoy lines negative, with BIDU at -108.96%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-609.52%
Negative yoy acquisition while BIDU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-49.79%
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.
2.74%
Liquidation growth of 2.74% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-85.60%
We reduce yoy other investing while BIDU is 130.60%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-266.60%
We reduce yoy invests while BIDU stands at 121.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
81.95%
Debt repayment growth of 81.95% 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.
-2.83%
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.