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.
-25.95%
Negative revenue growth while 0819.HK stands at 17.44%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-48.58%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-122.15%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-122.15%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-112.71%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-111.92%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-111.92%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
5.84%
Slight or no buybacks while 0819.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
5.85%
Slight or no buyback while 0819.HK is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-1.18%
Dividend reduction while 0819.HK stands at 214.04%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
21.66%
Positive OCF growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
22.08%
Positive FCF growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-40.24%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 1173.81%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-52.05%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 300.80%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
20.63%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 0819.HK's 150.31%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-6853.77%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-29.54%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-75.23%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-114.02%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 0819.HK is at 104.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-118.06%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0819.HK is 66.88%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-148.19%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0819.HK is 28.92%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
90.48%
Below 50% of 0819.HK's 470.07%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-2.50%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0819.HK is at 257.99%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
38.48%
Below 50% of 0819.HK's 148.30%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-24.01%
Cut dividends over 10 years while 0819.HK stands at 595.78%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-60.78%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 26.84%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-60.06%
Negative near-term dividend growth while 0819.HK invests at 61.73%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-20.45%
Firm’s AR is declining while 0819.HK shows 47.21%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
6.44%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. 0819.HK's 43.00%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-4.93%
Negative asset growth while 0819.HK invests at 43.79%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
8.83%
Under 50% of 0819.HK's 54.54%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
7.92%
Debt shrinking faster vs. 0819.HK's 265.03%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
15.24%
We increase R&D while 0819.HK cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-27.52%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.