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.
-0.84%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-3.95%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-24.76%
Negative EBIT growth while 1475.HK is at 17.11%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-64.68%
Negative operating income growth while 1475.HK is at 17.11%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-34.02%
Negative net income growth while 1475.HK stands at 22.95%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-34.71%
Negative EPS growth while 1475.HK is at 4.33%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-31.31%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 1475.HK is at 4.33%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.27%
Slight or no buybacks while 1475.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.55%
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.
67.69%
OCF growth under 50% of 1475.HK's 478.79%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
45912.08%
FCF growth above 1.5x 1475.HK's 478.79%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
98192.55%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 48.14%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
489.72%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 1.53%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
115.01%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 27.24%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
248.29%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
342.41%
Positive OCF/share growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
596.77%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 596.77% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
1844.27%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 99.17% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
168.03%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 29.07%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
155.77%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x 1475.HK's 117.00%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
-4.80%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while 1475.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
3.97%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
35.34%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 1.06%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
-94.27%
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.
5.27%
Inventory growth well above 1475.HK's 9.72%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-61.88%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-100.00%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
15.45%
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.
4.08%
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.