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.
13.22%
Positive revenue growth while 8095.HK is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-3.20%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
36.76%
Positive EBIT growth while 8095.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-649.64%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-0.37%
Negative net income growth while 8095.HK stands at 3269.68%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
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.
83.62%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while 8095.HK is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
83.62%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 8095.HK is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
65.63%
Positive 3Y CAGR while 8095.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
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.
-156.87%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while 8095.HK is at 4552.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-156.87%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 8095.HK is 183636.91%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-277.76%
Negative 3Y CAGR while 8095.HK is 1471.44%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
46.13%
Below 50% of 8095.HK's 252.74%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
46.13%
Below 50% of 8095.HK's 164.66%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-48.56%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while 8095.HK is at 95.18%. 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.
21.00%
SG&A growth well above 8095.HK's 23.94%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.