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.
-36.92%
Negative revenue growth while 9698.HK stands at 7.57%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-28.71%
Negative gross profit growth while 9698.HK is at 11.18%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
41.46%
EBIT growth 75-90% of 9698.HK's 50.87%. Bill Ackman would push for cost reforms or better product mix to narrow the gap.
36.37%
Operating income growth at 75-90% of 9698.HK's 43.97%. Bill Ackman would demand a plan to enhance operating leverage.
33.37%
Net income growth comparable to 9698.HK's 34.72%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
34.60%
Positive EPS growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
34.60%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 9698.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.00%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-35.14%
Negative OCF growth while 9698.HK is at 463.47%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-34.72%
Negative FCF growth while 9698.HK is at 12.40%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-95.52%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 9698.HK stands at 186.04%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-87.79%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 9698.HK stands at 1745.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-53.53%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 9698.HK stands at 1167.68%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-152.98%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 9698.HK stands at 1149.78%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
63.76%
Below 50% of 9698.HK's 2421.34%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-0.65%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 9698.HK stands at 945.34%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-298.63%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-439.52%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-39.06%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-46.65%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while 9698.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-47.97%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 9698.HK is at 1223.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-45.59%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 9698.HK is at 517.33%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while 9698.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
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.
-7.45%
Negative asset growth while 9698.HK invests at 4.56%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-9.52%
We have a declining book value while 9698.HK shows 879.85%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-20.31%
We’re deleveraging while 9698.HK stands at 1.07%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-69.33%
Our R&D shrinks while 9698.HK invests at 9.11%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-29.69%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.