PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
1.64%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of 8070.HK's 1.92%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
4.53%
Positive gross profit growth while 8070.HK is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
36.67%
Positive EBIT growth while 8070.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-51.57%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
36.48%
Positive net income growth while 8070.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
36.26%
Positive EPS growth while 8070.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
35.16%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 8070.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.46%
Diluted share change of 0.46% while 8070.HK 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.
85.39%
10Y CAGR of 85.39% while 8070.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
85.39%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x 8070.HK's 70.94%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
38.65%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to 8070.HK's 36.98%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
1080.63%
OCF/share CAGR of 1080.63% while 8070.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
1080.63%
Positive OCF/share growth while 8070.HK is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
281.91%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 281.91% while 8070.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
281.91%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of 8070.HK's 512.71%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
1208.99%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x 8070.HK's 287.92%. 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.
-25.28%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 8070.HK is at 13.43%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. 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.
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.
33.68%
We expand SG&A while 8070.HK cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.