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.
2.34%
Revenue growth under 50% of 1113.HK's 6.87%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
24.74%
Positive gross profit growth while 1113.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
84.81%
Positive EBIT growth while 1113.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
2295.40%
Positive operating income growth while 1113.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-42.74%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-57.93%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-61.49%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-7.85%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-8.69%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-34.14%
Negative OCF growth while 1113.HK is at 603.06%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-100.00%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
3551.69%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1113.HK's 111.37%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
146.88%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 1113.HK is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
34.91%
Positive 3Y CAGR while 1113.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
177.47%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x 1113.HK's 63.43%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
280.14%
Positive OCF/share growth while 1113.HK is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-37.54%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
93.29%
Positive 10Y CAGR while 1113.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
70.78%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x 1113.HK's 48.52%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
45.80%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to 1113.HK's 48.52%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
-17.40%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while 1113.HK stands at 353.27%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
29.23%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x 1113.HK's 21.27%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
1.66%
Below 50% of 1113.HK's 10.95%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
7.22%
We show growth while 1113.HK is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-10.57%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-4.71%
We have a declining book value while 1113.HK shows 0.81%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-4.67%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-90.19%
We cut SG&A while 1113.HK invests at 7.64%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.