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.
3.32%
Revenue growth under 50% of BIDU's 8.59%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
3.65%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x BIDU's 0.18%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
183.25%
Positive EBIT growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
183.25%
Positive operating income growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
187.70%
Net income growth above 1.5x BIDU's 93.63%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
186.96%
EPS growth above 1.5x BIDU's 93.89%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
182.61%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x BIDU's 94.27%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.18%
Slight or no buybacks while BIDU is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.09%
Slight or no buyback while BIDU is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
30.38%
OCF growth of 30.38% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
70.31%
FCF growth of 70.31% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
449.94%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of BIDU's 2914.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
117.24%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of BIDU's 218.04%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
78.12%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x BIDU's 53.24%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
446.07%
OCF/share CAGR of 446.07% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
149.20%
OCF/share CAGR of 149.20% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
116.81%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 116.81% while BIDU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
543.62%
Below 50% of BIDU's 3398.79%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
196.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of BIDU's 307.79%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
127.76%
Below 50% of BIDU's 335.80%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
458.33%
Below 50% of BIDU's 5466.46%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
96.24%
Below 50% of BIDU's 356.37%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
44.05%
Below 50% of BIDU's 184.22%. 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.
4.77%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. BIDU's 424.22%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
73.64%
We show growth while BIDU is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
4.69%
Positive asset growth while BIDU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.65%
50-75% of BIDU's 7.09%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation 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.
2.31%
We increase R&D while BIDU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
2.33%
SG&A declining or stable vs. BIDU's 25.22%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.