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.
7.70%
Net income growth under 50% of BIDU's 837.61%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
10.85%
Less D&A growth vs. BIDU's 384.31%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-99.45%
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.
29.01%
SBC growth well above BIDU's 34.44%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
-26.38%
Negative yoy working capital usage while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-194.02%
AR is negative yoy while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
2.27%
Inventory growth of 2.27% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
108.33%
AP growth of 108.33% 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.
24.80%
Growth of 24.80% 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.
50.00%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. BIDU's 129.02%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
-7.45%
Negative yoy CFO while BIDU is 319.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
5.32%
Lower CapEx growth vs. BIDU's 54.29%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
94.00%
Acquisition growth of 94.00% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
21.97%
Purchases growth of 21.97% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
30.01%
Liquidation growth of 30.01% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-28.00%
Both yoy lines negative, with BIDU at -126.96%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
40.75%
We have mild expansions while BIDU is negative at -126.96%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-13.60%
We cut debt repayment yoy while BIDU is 0.00%. 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.
-86.79%
We cut yoy buybacks while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.