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.
-68.47%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-65.37%
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.
6.14%
Operating income growth under 50% of 0354.HK's 204.29%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
10.76%
Net income growth under 50% of 0354.HK's 87.44%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
7.69%
EPS growth under 50% of 0354.HK's 90.17%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
7.69%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of 0354.HK's 90.78%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.00%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
49.88%
Positive OCF growth while 0354.HK is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
49.71%
Positive FCF growth while 0354.HK is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-97.45%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0354.HK stands at 269.38%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-96.44%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0354.HK stands at 54.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-90.02%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0354.HK stands at 22.43%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
115.36%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while 0354.HK is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-73.17%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0354.HK is at 25.80%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
185.35%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 0354.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-313.99%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 0354.HK is at 191.08%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-501.36%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-1283.84%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-28.65%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while 0354.HK stands at 226.18%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-32.91%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0354.HK is at 81.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-33.75%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 0354.HK is at 40.92%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while 0354.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-70.56%
Firm’s AR is declining while 0354.HK shows 10.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-53.13%
Inventory is declining while 0354.HK stands at 18.83%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-11.37%
Negative asset growth while 0354.HK invests at 5.77%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-9.24%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-20.58%
We’re deleveraging while 0354.HK stands at 93.79%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-67.07%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-20.36%
We cut SG&A while 0354.HK invests at 119.92%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.