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
12.80M / 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.
39.61%
Revenue growth above 1.5x 3606.HK's 1.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
17.91%
Positive gross profit growth while 3606.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
66.33%
Positive EBIT growth while 3606.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
66.33%
Positive operating income growth while 3606.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-47.50%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-11.19%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-47.67%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-40.81%
Share reduction while 3606.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while 3606.HK stands at 646.75%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
33.34%
Positive OCF growth while 3606.HK is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
22.09%
Positive FCF growth while 3606.HK is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
30.51%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 3606.HK's 235.26%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-1.91%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 3606.HK stands at 32.36%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
16.37%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of 3606.HK's 29.73%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
-267.39%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 3606.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-307.51%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 3606.HK is at 82.22%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
34.33%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of 3606.HK's 68.87%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
135.80%
Below 50% of 3606.HK's 300.08%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
97.13%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 3606.HK's 17.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-59.63%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 3606.HK is 11.86%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
418.24%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with 3606.HK's 423.04%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
52.20%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of 3606.HK's 104.40%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
23.32%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to 3606.HK's 21.33%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while 3606.HK stands at 1065.06%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.76%
Our AR growth while 3606.HK is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-3.93%
Inventory is declining while 3606.HK stands at 2.57%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
5.51%
Positive asset growth while 3606.HK is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
69.47%
Positive BV/share change while 3606.HK is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-22.54%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
97.36%
We increase R&D while 3606.HK cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
9.83%
We expand SG&A while 3606.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.