PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
0.68 - 0.75
0.33 - 0.86
18.36M / 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.
-15.81%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-20.70%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-93.78%
Negative EBIT growth while 0360.HK is at 113.77%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-93.78%
Negative operating income growth while 0360.HK is at 113.77%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-52.25%
Negative net income growth while 0360.HK stands at 122.64%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-41.23%
Negative EPS growth while 0360.HK is at 104.46%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-51.99%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 0360.HK is at 118.93%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-18.65%
Share reduction while 0360.HK is at 413.78%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.28%
Reduced diluted shares while 0360.HK is at 19.23%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-759.79%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-409.50%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-44.67%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-61.60%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-57.14%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-248.64%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-1024.04%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0360.HK is at 97.35%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-303.16%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 0360.HK stands at 91.92%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-78.89%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-57.34%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0360.HK is 102.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-26.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0360.HK is 173.21%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.74%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-19.59%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
27.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 27.51% while 0360.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
81.33%
Dividend/share CAGR of 81.33% while 0360.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
65.59%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 65.59% while 0360.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
45.51%
Our AR growth while 0360.HK is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-23.96%
Inventory is declining while 0360.HK stands at 32.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
6.27%
Asset growth well under 50% of 0360.HK's 34.87%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
22.10%
Positive BV/share change while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
89.98%
We have some new debt while 0360.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-34.95%
Our R&D shrinks while 0360.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
7.22%
We expand SG&A while 0360.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.