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.
16.70%
Positive revenue growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
15.77%
Positive gross profit growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
105.96%
EBIT growth of 105.96% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can be scaled further.
105.96%
Positive operating income growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
322.84%
Positive net income growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
330.00%
EPS growth of 330.00% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
344.83%
Diluted EPS growth of 344.83% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
-1.33%
Share reduction while 0376.HK is at 4.96%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-5.02%
Reduced diluted shares while 0376.HK is at 3.94%. 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.
120.51%
Positive OCF growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
276.82%
Positive FCF growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
87778.82%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
13.18%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
40.90%
Positive 3Y CAGR while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
4300.92%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
1020.89%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x 0376.HK's 21.42%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
4574.68%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x 0376.HK's 40.67%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
660.42%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 0376.HK's 73.53% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-48.70%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0376.HK is 51.82%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-43.92%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
538.69%
Equity/share CAGR of 538.69% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
104.48%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of 0376.HK's 139.05%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-91.11%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while 0376.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
46.46%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 46.46% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
3.48%
AR growth of 3.48% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
21.91%
Inventory growth of 21.91% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
2.59%
Asset growth well under 50% of 0376.HK's 11.42%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
18.28%
Under 50% of 0376.HK's 68.19%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.26%
We’re deleveraging while 0376.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
314.74%
R&D growth of 314.74% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
4.92%
We expand SG&A while 0376.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.