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.
-15.35%
Negative net income growth while BIDU stands at 395.81%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
5.85%
D&A growth of 5.85% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
210.88%
Deferred tax of 210.88% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
2.58%
SBC growth while BIDU is negative at -24.22%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-175.73%
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.
127.75%
AR growth of 127.75% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
-177.25%
Negative yoy inventory while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-346.43%
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.
-177.11%
Negative yoy usage while BIDU is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-206.45%
Both negative yoy, with BIDU at -2624.74%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-12.81%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with BIDU at -31.69%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
7.39%
CapEx growth of 7.39% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost burden that must yield returns in future revenue or margins.
100.00%
Acquisition growth of 100.00% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-8.61%
Negative yoy purchasing while BIDU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
6.89%
Liquidation growth of 6.89% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
92.59%
We have some outflow growth while BIDU is negative at -704.04%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
5.78%
We have mild expansions while BIDU is negative at -704.04%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
26.34%
Debt repayment growth of 26.34% 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.
-104.20%
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.