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 at 50-75% of 0425.HK's 10.56%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
52.56%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x 0425.HK's 19.37%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
90.29%
EBIT growth above 1.5x 0425.HK's 3.34%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
90.29%
Operating income growth above 1.5x 0425.HK's 3.34%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
1343.52%
Net income growth above 1.5x 0425.HK's 14.50%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
1220.00%
EPS growth above 1.5x 0425.HK's 14.29%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
1240.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x 0425.HK's 14.29%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.83%
Slight or no buybacks while 0425.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.00%
Reduced diluted shares while 0425.HK is at 0.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.60%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
13.50%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x 0425.HK's 10.74%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
11.76%
FCF growth under 50% of 0425.HK's 236.86%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-62.99%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0425.HK stands at 239.30%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-62.26%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0425.HK stands at 64.46%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-48.38%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0425.HK stands at 41.66%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-373.36%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0425.HK stands at 381.61%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-31.73%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0425.HK is at 79.18%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
37.34%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x 0425.HK's 17.11%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
9.63%
Below 50% of 0425.HK's 105.73%. 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 0425.HK is 50.72%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-87.71%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
25.71%
Below 50% of 0425.HK's 134.96%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-17.40%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0425.HK is at 39.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
21.45%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to 0425.HK's 22.75%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
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 0425.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-4.88%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-27.62%
Inventory is declining while 0425.HK stands at 13.64%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-4.57%
Negative asset growth while 0425.HK invests at 5.94%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.89%
Under 50% of 0425.HK's 5.76%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
4.18%
Debt growth far above 0425.HK's 1.24%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
47.15%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. 0425.HK's 26.87%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
51.97%
SG&A growth well above 0425.HK's 30.42%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.