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.
10.17%
Net income growth under 50% of BIDU's 48.63%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
11.33%
D&A growth of 11.33% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-17.82%
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.
16.57%
SBC growth while BIDU is negative at -30.78%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-271.20%
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.
-147.72%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
144.49%
AP growth of 144.49% 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.
93.48%
Growth of 93.48% 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.
175.76%
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.
6.39%
Some CFO growth while BIDU is negative at -354.71%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-27.80%
Both yoy lines negative, with BIDU at -24.30%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-95.19%
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.
198.35%
Liquidation growth of 198.35% while BIDU is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-645.56%
We reduce yoy other investing while BIDU is 151.30%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-29.73%
We reduce yoy invests while BIDU stands at 78.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
36.88%
Debt repayment growth of 36.88% 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.
20.28%
Buyback growth of 20.28% 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.