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.
54.18%
Positive revenue growth while 6247.T is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
46.39%
Positive gross profit growth while 6247.T is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
84.64%
EBIT growth above 1.5x 6247.T's 34.50%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
62.55%
Positive operating income growth while 6247.T is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
70.19%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x 6247.T's 50.73%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
70.18%
EPS growth 1.25-1.5x 6247.T's 50.75%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if strategic initiatives like cost cutting or better capital management explain the difference.
70.18%
Diluted EPS growth 1.25-1.5x 6247.T's 50.75%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic moves (e.g., targeted acquisitions, cost cuts) explain the edge.
-0.00%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.00%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
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.
20.46%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 6247.T's 53.27%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
1.20%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of 6247.T's 23.38%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-10.83%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 6247.T stands at 17.32%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
100.00%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with 6247.T's 100.00%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-214.80%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 6247.T is at 86.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-184.42%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 6247.T is 213.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-167.39%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 6247.T is 50.26%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
363.18%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x 6247.T's 44.45%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
45.89%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x 6247.T's 10.66%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
13.94%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x 6247.T's 8.16%. 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.
-3.03%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
4.92%
Inventory growth well above 6247.T's 9.65%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
4.17%
Asset growth above 1.5x 6247.T's 1.99%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-0.05%
We have a declining book value while 6247.T shows 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
4.90%
We have some new debt while 6247.T reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
12.70%
R&D growth of 12.70% while 6247.T is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
3.92%
We expand SG&A while 6247.T cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.