PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
8935.00 - 9125.00
6347.00 - 10045.00
380.0K / 335.9K (Avg.)
23.15 | 391.09
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.
-5.69%
Negative revenue growth while 2127.T stands at 111.09%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-7.03%
Negative gross profit growth while 2127.T is at 137.92%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-15.27%
Negative EBIT growth while 2127.T is at 255.63%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-30.94%
Negative operating income growth while 2127.T is at 292.97%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-15.78%
Negative net income growth while 2127.T stands at 228.30%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-15.82%
Negative EPS growth while 2127.T is at 229.27%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-15.82%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 2127.T is at 229.27%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.00%
Share reduction while 2127.T is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.00%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-100.00%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-50.98%
Negative OCF growth while 2127.T is at 574.09%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-113.96%
Negative FCF growth while 2127.T is at 581.47%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
34.87%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 16.52%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
34.87%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 16.52%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
34.87%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 16.52%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
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.
78.18%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 40.53% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
78.18%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 40.53%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
78.18%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 40.53%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
46.81%
Equity/share CAGR of 46.81% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
46.81%
Equity/share CAGR of 46.81% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
46.81%
Equity/share CAGR of 46.81% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.76%
Inventory growth of 5.76% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
1.70%
Asset growth well under 50% of 2127.T's 16.91%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
4.85%
50-75% of 2127.T's 8.68%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-12.38%
We’re deleveraging while 2127.T 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.