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.
-3.99%
Negative revenue growth while 2127.T stands at 21.65%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-3.25%
Negative gross profit growth while 2127.T is at 17.98%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-19.17%
Negative EBIT growth while 2127.T is at 22.71%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-27.13%
Negative operating income growth while 2127.T is at 21.17%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-25.66%
Negative net income growth while 2127.T stands at 23.13%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-25.65%
Negative EPS growth while 2127.T is at 23.14%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-25.65%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 2127.T is at 23.03%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.00%
Share reduction while 2127.T is at 0.02%. 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 0.09%. 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.
5.51%
OCF growth of 5.51% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
5.51%
FCF growth of 5.51% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
27.44%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 2127.T's 413.95%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
49.80%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to 2127.T's 50.26%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
23.09%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 7.35%. 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.
13.42%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 319.35%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
53.29%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 10.34%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
29.45%
Positive short-term CAGR while 2127.T is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
143.96%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 583.34%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
100.32%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of 2127.T's 152.58%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
49.44%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to 2127.T's 51.68%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
112.50%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 956.00%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
88.89%
5Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of 2127.T's 158.82%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging policy in mid-term shareholder returns.
70.00%
3Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of 2127.T's 100.00%. Martin Whitman might see a weaker short-term approach to distributing cash.
29.48%
AR growth well above 2127.T's 50.76%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
10.13%
We show growth while 2127.T is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.50%
Asset growth well under 50% of 2127.T's 10.32%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.47%
Under 50% of 2127.T's 6.09%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-8.57%
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.
3.12%
SG&A declining or stable vs. 2127.T's 11.79%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.