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.
-2.76%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
2.97%
Positive gross profit growth while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
71.06%
Positive operating income growth while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
136.02%
Positive net income growth while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
135.09%
Positive EPS growth while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
135.09%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
2.81%
Slight or no buybacks while 0458.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
2.75%
Diluted share change of 2.75% while 0458.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
2829.79%
Dividend growth of 2829.79% while 0458.HK is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-472.46%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-449.59%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
18.49%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
3.24%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
23.17%
Positive 3Y CAGR while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-1171.24%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-39.56%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-452.60%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 0458.HK stands at 77.92%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-97.91%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-96.95%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-95.95%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0458.HK is 6.19%. 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.
22.47%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
8.51%
Positive short-term equity growth while 0458.HK is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-75.69%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
-57.17%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
0.99%
Our AR growth while 0458.HK is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-19.74%
Inventory is declining while 0458.HK stands at 58.91%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-7.06%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-3.52%
We have a declining book value while 0458.HK shows 3.70%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
17.00%
We have some new debt while 0458.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-100.00%
Our R&D shrinks while 0458.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-16.72%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.