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.
-11.55%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with BIDU at -2740.31%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
0.50%
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.
-443.23%
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.
-6.63%
Both cut yoy SBC, with BIDU at -36.29%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
173.16%
Well above BIDU's 100.00% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
59.37%
AR growth well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
281.46%
Inventory growth of 281.46% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
498.28%
AP growth of 498.28% 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.
294.52%
Growth well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-247.62%
Negative yoy while BIDU is 133.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
6.38%
Some CFO growth while BIDU is negative at -57.72%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
6.48%
Some CapEx rise while BIDU is negative at -2283.61%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
62.16%
Acquisition spending well above BIDU's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier integration risk or short-term free cash flow drain vs. competitor.
24.39%
Purchases growth of 24.39% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
70.37%
Liquidation growth of 70.37% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-91.80%
Both yoy lines negative, with BIDU at -14.88%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
95.97%
We have mild expansions while BIDU is negative at -14.88%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-87.80%
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.
-90.11%
We cut yoy buybacks while BIDU is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.