PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.43 - 1.45
1.18 - 2.36
880.0K / 1.73M (Avg.)
-18.00 | -0.08
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.
14114.39%
Revenue growth above 1.5x 0315.HK's 2.43%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
-38888.36%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-212.09%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-439.49%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-438.03%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-438.03%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
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.
61.25%
Positive OCF growth while 0315.HK is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
52.52%
Positive FCF growth while 0315.HK is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-92.12%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 0315.HK stands at 495.94%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-93.31%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 0315.HK stands at 201.61%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-589.49%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 0315.HK stands at 88.19%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-125.25%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-128.25%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 0315.HK is at 1166.46%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-289.32%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 0315.HK is 4.43%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting 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.
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%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while 0315.HK stands at 119.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
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.
820.38%
We expand SG&A while 0315.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.