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
18.36M / 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.
18.56%
Positive revenue growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
9.40%
Positive gross profit growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
21.32%
EBIT growth of 21.32% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can be scaled further.
21.32%
Positive operating income growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
66.19%
Positive net income growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
67.59%
Positive EPS growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
67.59%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.74%
Share reduction while 0376.HK is at 1.53%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.67%
Reduced diluted shares while 0376.HK is at 1.61%. 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.
-166.08%
Negative OCF growth while 0376.HK is at 550.11%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-816.18%
Negative FCF growth while 0376.HK is at 517.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
47933.84%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 0376.HK's 167.27%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
1.19%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
9.55%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 0376.HK's 166.85%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-4802.15%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0376.HK stands at 148.53%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-181.71%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0376.HK is at 280.25%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-137.36%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 0376.HK stands at 350.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
387.58%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 0376.HK's 70.65% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-73.88%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-43.89%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0376.HK is 8.89%. 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.
152.38%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with 0376.HK's 160.24%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
54.75%
Below 50% of 0376.HK's 312.77%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-87.59%
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.
141.46%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 141.46% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
24.83%
AR growth of 24.83% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-12.51%
Inventory is declining while 0376.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
21.68%
Asset growth above 1.5x 0376.HK's 0.23%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
1.64%
Under 50% of 0376.HK's 15.35%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
281.70%
Debt growth of 281.70% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
75.26%
R&D growth of 75.26% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
7.69%
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.