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.
-0.85%
Negative revenue growth while BIDU stands at 9.76%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-4.16%
Negative gross profit growth while BIDU is at 12.37%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-11.92%
Negative EBIT growth while BIDU is at 56.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-11.92%
Negative operating income growth while BIDU is at 56.38%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-13.07%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-12.30%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-12.40%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.28%
Share reduction while BIDU is at 0.36%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.07%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
20.24%
OCF growth above 1.5x BIDU's 13.41%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
27.66%
FCF growth 1.25-1.5x BIDU's 18.76%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capex decisions or cost controls create a cash flow advantage.
394.18%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to BIDU's 421.65%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
165.36%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 37.85%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
81.87%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 15.61%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
488.24%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x BIDU's 131.71%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
152.32%
Positive OCF/share growth while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
60.97%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
544.72%
Positive 10Y CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
120.39%
Positive 5Y CAGR while BIDU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
109.80%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x BIDU's 94.35%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
276.02%
Below 50% of BIDU's 839.01%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
72.20%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of BIDU's 98.31%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
38.68%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to BIDU's 37.08%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
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.
-2.42%
Firm’s AR is declining while BIDU shows 31.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
59.39%
Inventory growth well above BIDU's 0.76%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.86%
Asset growth at 75-90% of BIDU's 1.02%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
0.58%
Positive BV/share change while BIDU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.68%
We have some new debt while BIDU reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
4.39%
We increase R&D while BIDU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
2.32%
SG&A declining or stable vs. BIDU's 8.55%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.