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.
-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%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.28%
Reduced diluted shares while 0819.HK is at 0.22%. 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%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 871.06%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-61.60%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 137.85%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-57.14%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 85.36%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-248.64%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 260.67%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-1024.04%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0819.HK is at 159.89%. 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 0819.HK is at 279.15%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-57.34%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0819.HK is 500.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-26.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0819.HK is 83.47%. 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 0819.HK is at 64.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-19.59%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 0819.HK is at 62.53%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
27.51%
Below 50% of 0819.HK's 580.27%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
81.33%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x 0819.HK's 9.53%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
65.59%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 65.59% while 0819.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
45.51%
Our AR growth while 0819.HK is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-23.96%
Inventory is declining while 0819.HK stands at 23.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
6.27%
Asset growth well under 50% of 0819.HK's 15.45%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
22.10%
BV/share growth above 1.5x 0819.HK's 2.08%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
89.98%
Debt growth far above 0819.HK's 53.29%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-34.95%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
7.22%
We expand SG&A while 0819.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.