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.
8.95%
Positive revenue growth while 2127.T is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
3.35%
Positive gross profit growth while 2127.T is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-4.69%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-15.56%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
4.01%
Positive net income growth while 2127.T is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
4.00%
Positive EPS growth while 2127.T is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
4.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 2127.T is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-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%
Reduced diluted shares while 2127.T is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
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.
2.70%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 2127.T's 155.58%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
2.70%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 2127.T's 155.58%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-21.41%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 2127.T stands at 139.12%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-100.00%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-100.00%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-100.00%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
7.58%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 286.19%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
7.58%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 286.19%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-26.90%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 2127.T is 509.58%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
36.05%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 137.81%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
36.05%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 137.81%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-8.39%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 2127.T is at 89.16%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability 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.
-14.29%
Negative near-term dividend growth while 2127.T invests at 2299.92%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
25112.50%
AR growth of 25112.50% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
1.54%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. 2127.T's 58.03%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
10.94%
Asset growth at 75-90% of 2127.T's 13.00%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
4.72%
50-75% of 2127.T's 9.05%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
116.68%
Debt growth of 116.68% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-31.48%
We cut SG&A while 2127.T invests at 26.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.