PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.44 - 1.45
1.18 - 2.36
71.0K / 1.73M (Avg.)
-18.12 | -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.
30.67%
Positive revenue growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
37.54%
Positive gross profit growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
106.77%
Positive EBIT growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-3.87%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
104.84%
Positive net income growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
104.88%
Positive EPS growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
104.88%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.29%
Share count expansion well above 1475.HK's 0.07%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.29%
Diluted share count expanding well above 1475.HK's 0.02%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
24.80%
OCF growth of 24.80% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
22.77%
FCF growth of 22.77% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
-46.01%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 1475.HK stands at 14.14%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
11235.06%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 14.14%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
861.29%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 10.06%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-130.40%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 1475.HK stands at 86.49%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
40.30%
Below 50% of 1475.HK's 86.49%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
32.39%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of 1475.HK's 117.19%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-94.86%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
120.89%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
101.17%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 46.39%. 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.
-9.56%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 1475.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-24.09%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 1475.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while 1475.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while 1475.HK stands at 0.00%. 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.
67.60%
Inventory growth of 67.60% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
-4.84%
Negative asset growth while 1475.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.16%
We have a declining book value while 1475.HK shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-71.03%
We’re deleveraging while 1475.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
132.92%
SG&A growth well above 1475.HK's 15.47%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.