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%
Positive operating income growth while 0455.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
10.76%
Positive net income growth while 0455.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
7.69%
Positive EPS growth while 0455.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
7.69%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 0455.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.00%
Share reduction while 0455.HK is at 0.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than 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.
49.88%
OCF growth under 50% of 0455.HK's 103.40%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
49.71%
FCF growth 50-75% of 0455.HK's 96.50%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
-97.45%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0455.HK stands at 59.92%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-96.44%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-90.02%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
115.36%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while 0455.HK is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-73.17%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
185.35%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x 0455.HK's 108.01%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-313.99%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-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%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0455.HK is 35.61%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-28.65%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-32.91%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-33.75%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while 0455.HK stands at 156.02%. 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%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-53.13%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-11.37%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-9.24%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-20.58%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-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%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.