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.
6.19%
Revenue growth above 1.5x 1475.HK's 0.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
0.62%
Gross profit growth under 50% of 1475.HK's 6.78%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-184.03%
Negative EBIT growth while 1475.HK is at 41.79%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-269.98%
Negative operating income growth while 1475.HK is at 39.12%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-184.58%
Negative net income growth while 1475.HK stands at 19.73%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-188.40%
Negative EPS growth while 1475.HK is at 26.55%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-188.40%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 1475.HK is at 26.55%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.15%
Slight or no buybacks while 1475.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-4.03%
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.
262.25%
OCF growth of 262.25% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
607.60%
FCF growth of 607.60% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
619104.39%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 68.49%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
1092.96%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 22.14%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
181.58%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 47.61%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-38.63%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
260.50%
Positive OCF/share growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
283.47%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-358.45%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 1475.HK is at 77.80%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
45.57%
Below 50% of 1475.HK's 818.17%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-1162.13%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 1475.HK is 95.82%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
152.31%
Equity/share CAGR of 152.31% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-8.90%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 1475.HK is at 19.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
7.04%
Below 50% of 1475.HK's 20.37%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-42.33%
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.
5.08%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. 1475.HK's 33.53%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
5.43%
Asset growth above 1.5x 1475.HK's 1.39%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-7.19%
We have a declining book value while 1475.HK shows 7.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
39.38%
We have some new debt while 1475.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
31.23%
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.