PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Wuling Motors Holdings Limited (0305.HK)
0.700.02 (-2.78%)
0.68 - 0.75
0.33 - 0.86
12.91M / 4.66M (Avg.)
35.00 | 0.02
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
-30.74%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-30.74%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
67.30%
Positive EBIT growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
67.30%
Positive operating income growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
49.84%
Positive net income growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
49.69%
Positive EPS growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
49.69%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-116.41%
Negative OCF growth while 0819.HK is at 539.82%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-116.64%
Negative FCF growth while 0819.HK is at 75.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-63.43%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 253.81%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-63.43%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 30.23%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-63.43%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
67.31%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
67.31%
Positive OCF/share growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
67.31%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
56.93%
Below 50% of 0819.HK's 160.15%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
56.93%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
56.93%
Positive short-term CAGR while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-11.99%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.