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.
5.99%
Revenue growth under 50% of 0360.HK's 16.85%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
52.56%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x 0360.HK's 7.92%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
90.29%
Positive EBIT growth while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
90.29%
Positive operating income growth while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
1343.52%
Positive net income growth while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
1220.00%
Positive EPS growth while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
1240.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.83%
Slight or no buybacks while 0360.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.00%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.60%
Dividend reduction while 0360.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
13.50%
Positive OCF growth while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
11.76%
Positive FCF growth while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-62.99%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-62.26%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0360.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-48.38%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0360.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-373.36%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0360.HK stands at 153.39%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-31.73%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0360.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
37.34%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 37.34% while 0360.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
9.63%
Below 50% of 0360.HK's 97.21%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-44.38%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0360.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-87.71%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0360.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
25.71%
Positive growth while 0360.HK is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-17.40%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0360.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
21.45%
Equity/share CAGR of 21.45% while 0360.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
9.32%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 9.32% while 0360.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-4.88%
Firm’s AR is declining while 0360.HK shows 11.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-27.62%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-4.57%
Negative asset growth while 0360.HK invests at 2.88%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.89%
Under 50% of 0360.HK's 2.49%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
4.18%
Debt shrinking faster vs. 0360.HK's 12.80%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
47.15%
R&D growth of 47.15% while 0360.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
51.97%
SG&A declining or stable vs. 0360.HK's 161.78%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.