0.07 - 0.07
0.04 - 0.15
840.0K / 2.59M (Avg.)
-2.33 | -0.03
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.
40.79%
Revenue growth under 50% of 8028.HK's 157.37%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
18.55%
Gross profit growth under 50% of 8028.HK's 97.31%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-27.49%
Negative EBIT growth while 8028.HK is at 372.98%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-46.41%
Negative operating income growth while 8028.HK is at 212.93%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
6.44%
Net income growth under 50% of 8028.HK's 159.32%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
14.29%
EPS growth under 50% of 8028.HK's 159.34%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
14.29%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of 8028.HK's 159.34%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-3.54%
Share reduction while 8028.HK is at 0.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
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.
-6.41%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 8028.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-6.41%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 8028.HK stands at 396.68%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-6.41%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
100.00%
OCF/share CAGR of 100.00% while 8028.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
100.00%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to 8028.HK's 100.00%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
100.00%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 8028.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
111.76%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 111.76% while 8028.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
111.76%
Below 50% of 8028.HK's 303.72%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
111.76%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to 8028.HK's 115.22%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
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.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
27.75%
SG&A growth well above 8028.HK's 1.44%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.