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.
-10.42%
Negative revenue growth while 8070.HK stands at 34.72%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-27.58%
Negative gross profit growth while 8070.HK is at 32.54%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
39.97%
EBIT growth 50-75% of 8070.HK's 59.99%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
30.52%
Positive operating income growth while 8070.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
16.54%
Net income growth under 50% of 8070.HK's 162.25%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
16.25%
EPS growth under 50% of 8070.HK's 163.54%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
16.25%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of 8070.HK's 163.54%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.01%
Slight or no buybacks while 8070.HK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-73.69%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-73.69%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
7.30%
10Y CAGR of 7.30% while 8070.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
-43.36%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 8070.HK stands at 47.85%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-51.69%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 8070.HK stands at 10.41%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-39.61%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while 8070.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-306.99%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 8070.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
50.91%
Below 50% of 8070.HK's 249.72%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-173.54%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 8070.HK is 14.10%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
142.79%
Equity/share CAGR of 142.79% while 8070.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-16.73%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while 8070.HK is at 97.17%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-8.31%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 8070.HK is at 91.78%. 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.
-8.26%
Firm’s AR is declining while 8070.HK shows 233.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-37.46%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
23.13%
Asset growth above 1.5x 8070.HK's 10.72%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-13.13%
We have a declining book value while 8070.HK shows 9.41%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
172.72%
We have some new debt while 8070.HK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-24.32%
We cut SG&A while 8070.HK invests at 1.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.