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.
-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%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-93.78%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-52.25%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-41.23%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-51.99%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-18.65%
Share reduction while 0376.HK is at 1.29%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.28%
Reduced diluted shares while 0376.HK is at 0.30%. 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%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0376.HK stands at 71.11%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-1024.04%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0376.HK is at 39.15%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-303.16%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-78.89%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 0376.HK is at 78.08%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-57.34%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0376.HK is 32.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-26.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0376.HK is 30.12%. 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%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0376.HK is at 233.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-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 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
81.33%
Dividend/share CAGR of 81.33% while 0376.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 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
45.51%
AR growth of 45.51% while 0376.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-23.96%
Inventory is declining while 0376.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
6.27%
Positive asset growth while 0376.HK is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
22.10%
Positive BV/share change while 0376.HK is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
89.98%
We have some new debt while 0376.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-34.95%
Our R&D shrinks while 0376.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 0376.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.