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.
27.63%
Net income growth above 1.5x BIDU's 15.28%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
19.13%
Some D&A expansion while BIDU is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-92.31%
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.
6.70%
Less SBC growth vs. BIDU's 71.87%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
-111.46%
Negative yoy working capital usage while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
28.45%
AR growth of 28.45% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
-91.58%
Negative yoy inventory while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-2000.00%
Negative yoy AP while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-90.89%
Negative yoy usage while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-4.69%
Both negative yoy, with BIDU at -647.16%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-28.14%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with BIDU at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
-5.97%
Negative yoy CapEx while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
86.89%
Acquisition spending well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier integration risk or short-term free cash flow drain vs. competitor.
53.71%
Purchases growth of 53.71% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
4.93%
Liquidation growth of 4.93% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
51800.00%
Growth well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
247.39%
Investing outflow well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-1648.35%
We cut debt repayment yoy while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.27%
Buyback growth of 3.27% 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.