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
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
16.39%
Revenue growth above 1.5x BIDU's 0.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
8.61%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x BIDU's 3.61%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-1.52%
Negative EBIT growth while BIDU is at 1.57%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1.52%
Negative operating income growth while BIDU is at 1.57%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-144.86%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-144.90%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-145.83%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.14%
Share count expansion well above BIDU's 0.23%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-1.29%
Reduced diluted shares while BIDU is at 0.38%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.01%
Positive OCF growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-5.89%
Negative FCF growth while BIDU is at 23.21%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
499.60%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of BIDU's 3865.06%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
132.08%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of BIDU's 273.73%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
74.61%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to BIDU's 69.15%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
442.96%
OCF/share CAGR of 442.96% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
108.66%
Below 50% of BIDU's 251.56%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
57.79%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 57.79% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
-324.13%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while BIDU is at 1719.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-199.29%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while BIDU is 49.54%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-162.09%
Negative 3Y CAGR while BIDU is 29.95%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
501.80%
Below 50% of BIDU's 5402.42%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
101.77%
Below 50% of BIDU's 344.98%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
42.72%
Below 50% of BIDU's 125.85%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
20.08%
Our AR growth while BIDU is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-2.09%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
4.09%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x BIDU's 3.40%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
-3.06%
We have a declining book value while BIDU shows 15.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.13%
We have some new debt while BIDU reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.40%
R&D dropping or stable vs. BIDU's 14.25%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
31.25%
We expand SG&A while BIDU cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.