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%
Revenue growth above 1.5x 9698.HK's 8.21%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
-10.09%
Negative gross profit growth while 9698.HK is at 3.07%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
138.46%
Positive operating income growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
151.67%
Positive net income growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
151.78%
Positive EPS growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
151.78%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.01%
Share reduction more than 1.5x 9698.HK's 0.79%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
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 9698.HK is at 209.56%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-86.89%
Negative FCF growth while 9698.HK is at 68.99%. 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%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-78.61%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 9698.HK stands at 154.99%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-77.79%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 9698.HK stands at 162.61%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-80.81%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 9698.HK is at 162.61%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
107.75%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of 9698.HK's 275.86%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-90.66%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 9698.HK is at 91.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-85.69%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 9698.HK is 91.45%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
408.55%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 9698.HK's 14.77%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
35.33%
Equity/share CAGR of 35.33% while 9698.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-3.60%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 9698.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-5.94%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 9698.HK is at 229.10%. 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.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while 9698.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 9698.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
7.33%
AR growth well above 9698.HK's 4.12%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-41.82%
Inventory is declining while 9698.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.13%
Asset growth well under 50% of 9698.HK's 30.42%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
0.62%
Under 50% of 9698.HK's 30.61%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-65.57%
We’re deleveraging while 9698.HK stands at 22.56%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-100.00%
Our R&D shrinks while 9698.HK invests at 17.14%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-26.11%
We cut SG&A while 9698.HK invests at 26.53%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.