PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Wuling Motors Holdings Limited (0305.HK)
0.690.03 (-4.17%)
0.68 - 0.75
0.33 - 0.86
18.34M / 4.66M (Avg.)
34.50 | 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.
-13.40%
Negative revenue growth while 0335.HK stands at 6.76%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-37.16%
Negative gross profit growth while 0335.HK is at 6.77%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-160.18%
Negative EBIT growth while 0335.HK is at 49.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-160.18%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-2470.86%
Negative net income growth while 0335.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-2340.00%
Negative EPS growth while 0335.HK is at 268231675700.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-2611.11%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
8.64%
Share count expansion well above 0335.HK's 0.00%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-0.01%
Reduced diluted shares while 0335.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-3.94%
Dividend reduction while 0335.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
6.72%
OCF growth under 50% of 0335.HK's 125.64%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
8.02%
FCF growth under 50% of 0335.HK's 125.61%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-50.96%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-59.12%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0335.HK stands at 5.54%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-37.20%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-369.96%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0335.HK stands at 4309.46%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
8.30%
Positive OCF/share growth while 0335.HK is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
36.01%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of 0335.HK's 136.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-175.70%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 0335.HK is at 5529.71%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-159.50%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0335.HK is 7231.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-1528.07%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0335.HK is 6128.97%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
63.91%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of 0335.HK's 126.37%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
-16.92%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0335.HK is at 14.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-22.64%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 0335.HK is at 2.61%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
64.08%
Below 50% of 0335.HK's 299.97%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
-75.82%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while 0335.HK stands at 11.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-33.71%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
1.80%
AR growth of 1.80% while 0335.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-26.93%
Inventory is declining while 0335.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
11.24%
Positive asset growth while 0335.HK is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-11.94%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
77.55%
We have some new debt while 0335.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-34.23%
Our R&D shrinks while 0335.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-10.18%
We cut SG&A while 0335.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.