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.
169.78%
Revenue growth above 1.5x 0458.HK's 5.10%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
155.92%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x 0458.HK's 3.34%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-11.38%
Negative operating income growth while 0458.HK is at 49.03%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-22.27%
Negative net income growth while 0458.HK stands at 30.85%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-25.00%
Negative EPS growth while 0458.HK is at 33.33%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-25.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 0458.HK is at 33.33%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.00%
Share change of 0.00% while 0458.HK is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-150.29%
Negative OCF growth while 0458.HK is at 384.47%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-151.12%
Negative FCF growth while 0458.HK is at 933.74%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-95.07%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0458.HK stands at 0.71%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-84.27%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0458.HK stands at 85.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-52.13%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0458.HK stands at 56.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-134.80%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0458.HK stands at 5.03%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-106.88%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 0458.HK is at 150.12%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-133.72%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 0458.HK stands at 82.06%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-286.02%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 0458.HK is at 13.25%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-554.45%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0458.HK is 3473.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-22938.97%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 0458.HK is 386.76%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-40.61%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-41.53%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 0458.HK is at 37.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-42.11%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 0458.HK is at 13.92%. 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-100.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-13.28%
Negative asset growth while 0458.HK invests at 2.98%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-12.51%
We have a declining book value while 0458.HK shows 8.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
34.59%
We have some new debt while 0458.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
117.33%
R&D growth of 117.33% while 0458.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
13.96%
We expand SG&A while 0458.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.