PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
0.34 - 0.34
0.23 - 0.41
110.0K / 51.2K (Avg.)
-1.33 | -0.26
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.
31.40%
Positive revenue growth while 0354.HK is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-10.09%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
138.46%
Operating income growth above 1.5x 0354.HK's 0.97%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
151.67%
Net income growth above 1.5x 0354.HK's 2.34%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
151.78%
EPS growth of 151.78% while 0354.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
151.78%
Diluted EPS growth of 151.78% while 0354.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
0.01%
Share reduction more than 1.5x 0354.HK's 2.55%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-86.14%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-86.89%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-67.50%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0354.HK stands at 215.73%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-62.33%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0354.HK stands at 106.97%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-78.61%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0354.HK stands at 37.98%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-77.79%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-80.81%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0354.HK is at 41.68%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
107.75%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x 0354.HK's 48.51%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-90.66%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 0354.HK is at 934.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-85.69%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0354.HK is 134.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
408.55%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 0354.HK's 54.34%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
35.33%
Below 50% of 0354.HK's 270.61%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-3.60%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0354.HK is at 92.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-5.94%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 0354.HK is at 43.10%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while 0354.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-100.00%
Negative near-term dividend growth while 0354.HK invests at 92.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
7.33%
AR growth well above 0354.HK's 12.22%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-41.82%
Inventory is declining while 0354.HK stands at 64.02%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.13%
Asset growth well under 50% of 0354.HK's 9.27%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
0.62%
Under 50% of 0354.HK's 7.52%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-65.57%
We’re deleveraging while 0354.HK stands at 21.02%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-100.00%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-26.11%
We cut SG&A while 0354.HK invests at 58.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.