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.
-0.18%
Negative net income growth while BIDU stands at 0.73%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
8.64%
D&A growth of 8.64% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-853.46%
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.
11.42%
SBC growth while BIDU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-113.97%
Negative yoy working capital usage while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-196.53%
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.
173.49%
AP growth of 173.49% 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.
-7.64%
Negative yoy usage while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
73.46%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. BIDU's 879.25%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
-7.65%
Negative yoy CFO while BIDU is 34.71%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-9.77%
Both yoy lines negative, with BIDU at -3.93%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
57.38%
Acquisition growth of 57.38% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-6.53%
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.
33.94%
Liquidation growth of 33.94% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-231.68%
We reduce yoy other investing while BIDU is 1610.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
67.53%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. BIDU's 554.46%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
57.16%
Debt repayment growth of 57.16% 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.
0.08%
Buyback growth of 0.08% 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.