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.
5.99%
Revenue growth above 1.5x 0819.HK's 2.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
52.56%
Positive gross profit growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
90.29%
Positive EBIT growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
90.29%
Positive operating income growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
1343.52%
Positive net income growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
1220.00%
Positive EPS growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
1240.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.83%
Slight or no buybacks while 0819.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.00%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.60%
Dividend reduction while 0819.HK stands at 223.47%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
13.50%
Positive OCF growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
11.76%
Positive FCF growth while 0819.HK is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-62.99%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 435.71%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-62.26%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 111.36%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-48.38%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 39.05%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-373.36%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0819.HK stands at 54.11%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-31.73%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
37.34%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of 0819.HK's 354.16%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
9.63%
Below 50% of 0819.HK's 1583.73%. 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 0819.HK is 35.00%. 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 0819.HK's 414.72%. 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 0819.HK is at 210.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
21.45%
Below 50% of 0819.HK's 83.61%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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%
Below 50% of 0819.HK's 221.65%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-4.88%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-27.62%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-4.57%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.89%
Under 50% of 0819.HK's 5.29%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
4.18%
We have some new debt while 0819.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
47.15%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. 0819.HK's 32.37%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
51.97%
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.