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.
-9.05%
Negative revenue growth while 6247.T stands at 21.67%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-14.49%
Negative gross profit growth while 6247.T is at 45.77%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-42.44%
Negative EBIT growth while 6247.T is at 72.62%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-32.96%
Negative operating income growth while 6247.T is at 423.70%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-59.68%
Negative net income growth while 6247.T stands at 229.42%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-58.66%
Negative EPS growth while 6247.T is at 229.10%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-58.66%
Negative diluted EPS growth while 6247.T is at 229.10%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-90.71%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-90.71%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-15.81%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 6247.T stands at 10.69%. 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.
101.62%
Positive 10Y CAGR while 6247.T is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
101.62%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 6247.T is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-75.64%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 6247.T is 281.08%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-71.80%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while 6247.T stands at 25.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-71.80%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 6247.T is at 25.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
120.78%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x 6247.T's 18.89%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
1.02%
AR growth of 1.02% while 6247.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-36.90%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-15.23%
Negative asset growth while 6247.T invests at 2.11%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-3.93%
We have a declining book value while 6247.T shows 3.26%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-44.57%
We’re deleveraging while 6247.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.
-2.75%
We cut SG&A while 6247.T invests at 7.55%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.