PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1536.00 - 1565.00
1090.00 - 1784.00
46.2K / 155.6K (Avg.)
23.48 | 66.41
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.
-24.58%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-8.14%
Negative gross profit growth while 5715.T is at 8.33%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-22.71%
Negative EBIT growth while 5715.T is at 2586.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-23.04%
Negative operating income growth while 5715.T is at 118.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-37.52%
Negative net income growth while 5715.T stands at 1572.22%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-49.97%
Negative EPS growth while 5715.T is at 1571.15%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-49.97%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 5715.T is at 1571.15%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
24.85%
Share count expansion well above 5715.T's 0.00%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
24.85%
Diluted share change of 24.85% while 5715.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
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.
-91.25%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 5715.T stands at 24.39%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-91.25%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 5715.T stands at 24.39%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-18.07%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 5715.T stands at 8.72%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
100.00%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with 5715.T's 100.00%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
100.00%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to 5715.T's 100.00%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
100.00%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 5715.T is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
101.91%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of 5715.T's 165.79%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
101.91%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of 5715.T's 165.79%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
620.60%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 5715.T's 245.45%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
31.83%
Positive short-term equity growth while 5715.T is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
-15.23%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
12.45%
We show growth while 5715.T is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
5.28%
Positive asset growth while 5715.T is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-12.52%
We have a declining book value while 5715.T shows 2.57%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
8.66%
Debt growth far above 5715.T's 3.45%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.07%
We expand SG&A while 5715.T cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.