PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.44 - 1.45
1.18 - 2.36
61.0K / 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.
23.19%
Positive revenue growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-16.23%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-1724.67%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
2.41%
Positive operating income growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-2395.97%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-2389.16%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-2389.16%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.16%
Slight or no buybacks while 1475.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.16%
Diluted share change of 0.16% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
27.59%
OCF growth of 27.59% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
20.17%
FCF growth of 20.17% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
-33.59%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 1475.HK stands at 10.16%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
64142.86%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 10.16%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
815.52%
Positive 3Y CAGR while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-121.97%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 1475.HK stands at 86.61%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-20.09%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 1475.HK is at 86.61%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
22.17%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of 1475.HK's 39.21%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
-217.80%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-29.05%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-22.71%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-47.75%
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.
-26.24%
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.
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.
25.73%
Inventory growth well above 1475.HK's 8.14%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
11.49%
Positive asset growth while 1475.HK is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-7.74%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
390.08%
Debt growth far above 1475.HK's 21.14%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
306.60%
We expand SG&A while 1475.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.