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.
-4.06%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-8.23%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-22.68%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-72.83%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-42.27%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-42.34%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-42.22%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.08%
Share count expansion well above 1475.HK's 0.06%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.01%
Diluted share change of 0.01% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while 1475.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-63.88%
Negative OCF growth while 1475.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-80.46%
Negative FCF growth while 1475.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
47013.22%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 46.84%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
313.21%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 36.59%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
30.64%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 9.38%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
159.90%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
185.52%
Positive OCF/share growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-62.94%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 1475.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
603.05%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 45.76% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
130.57%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of 1475.HK's 201.42%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
-57.34%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
0.64%
Equity/share CAGR of 0.64% while 1475.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
16.51%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x 1475.HK's 2.75%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
7.76%
Positive short-term equity growth while 1475.HK is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-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.
-7.95%
Inventory is declining while 1475.HK stands at 3.30%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
180.97%
Positive asset growth while 1475.HK is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-10.30%
We’re deleveraging while 1475.HK stands at 12.91%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-100.00%
Our R&D shrinks while 1475.HK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-5.33%
We cut SG&A while 1475.HK invests at 0.56%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.