PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
743.76 - 757.57
479.80 - 796.25
8.25M / 11.73M (Avg.)
27.40 | 27.58
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.
-5.42%
Negative net income growth while BIDU stands at 48.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
34.72%
D&A growth of 34.72% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-87.13%
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.
9.38%
SBC growth while BIDU is negative at -30.78%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
178.81%
Working capital change of 178.81% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
20.00%
AR growth of 20.00% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
183.57%
Inventory growth of 183.57% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
190.00%
AP growth of 190.00% 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.
205.24%
Growth of 205.24% 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.
82.33%
Some yoy increase while BIDU is negative at -318.75%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
337.98%
Some CFO growth while BIDU is negative at -354.71%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-3.03%
Both yoy lines negative, with BIDU at -24.30%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
66.67%
Acquisition growth of 66.67% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
55.04%
Purchases growth of 55.04% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
300.00%
Growth well above BIDU's 151.30%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
60.88%
Investing outflow well above BIDU's 78.62%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
13.21%
Debt repayment growth of 13.21% 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.