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.
-2.85%
Negative revenue growth while 2127.T stands at 32.48%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.33%
Negative gross profit growth while 2127.T is at 55.84%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-21.34%
Negative EBIT growth while 2127.T is at 172.42%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-23.85%
Negative operating income growth while 2127.T is at 155.73%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-21.96%
Negative net income growth while 2127.T stands at 200.04%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-22.00%
Negative EPS growth while 2127.T is at 203.90%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-22.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 2127.T is at 203.90%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.06%
Slight or no buybacks while 2127.T is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.06%
Slight or no buyback while 2127.T is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.15%
OCF growth of 5.15% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
5.15%
FCF growth of 5.15% while 2127.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
170.42%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 2127.T's 407.75%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
62.00%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 28.84%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
34.07%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 13.40%. 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.
99.06%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 343.80%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
23.20%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 2127.T is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-9.07%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
341.28%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of 2127.T's 406.32%. Bill Ackman would push for either higher ROE or more earnings retention to catch the competitor.
88.66%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with 2127.T's 87.18%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
40.10%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 11.30%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
140.00%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 780.00%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
166.67%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x 2127.T's 100.00%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
9.09%
Below 50% of 2127.T's 69.23%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
5.48%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. 2127.T's 87.95%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
6.87%
We show growth while 2127.T is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.24%
Asset growth well under 50% of 2127.T's 5.04%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.53%
Under 50% of 2127.T's 7.60%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-5.67%
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.
2.76%
We expand SG&A while 2127.T cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.