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 8198.HK is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-10.09%
Negative gross profit growth while 8198.HK is at 6550.77%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
138.46%
Operating income growth above 1.5x 8198.HK's 13.04%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
151.67%
Net income growth above 1.5x 8198.HK's 29.10%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
151.78%
EPS growth above 1.5x 8198.HK's 29.03%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
151.78%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x 8198.HK's 29.03%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.01%
Share change of 0.01% while 8198.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.
-86.14%
Negative OCF growth while 8198.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-86.89%
Negative FCF growth while 8198.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-67.50%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-62.33%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 8198.HK stands at 348.84%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-78.61%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 8198.HK stands at 16546.01%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-77.79%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 8198.HK stands at 6.94%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-80.81%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
107.75%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 8198.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-90.66%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 8198.HK is at 89.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-85.69%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
408.55%
Positive short-term CAGR while 8198.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
35.33%
Below 50% of 8198.HK's 127.37%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-3.60%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-5.94%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while 8198.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 8198.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
7.33%
AR growth of 7.33% while 8198.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-41.82%
Inventory is declining while 8198.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.13%
Asset growth of 3.13% while 8198.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
0.62%
BV/share growth of 0.62% while 8198.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
-65.57%
We’re deleveraging while 8198.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-100.00%
Our R&D shrinks while 8198.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-26.11%
We cut SG&A while 8198.HK invests at 13.50%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.