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.
0.00%
Revenue growth under 50% of 9698.HK's 6.50%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.00%
Positive EBIT growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-0.16%
Negative operating income growth while 9698.HK is at 13.51%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
0.23%
Positive net income growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2.18%
Positive EPS growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
2.18%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
97.16%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
97.16%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
97.16%
Positive 3Y CAGR while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-368.11%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 9698.HK stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-368.11%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-368.11%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
168.86%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 9698.HK's 100.00% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
168.86%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 9698.HK's 100.00%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
168.86%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 9698.HK's 100.00%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
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.
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.
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.
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.
0.00%
We expand SG&A while 9698.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.