PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
0.14 - 0.14
0.08 - 0.20
5.0K / 202.5K (Avg.)
-6.75 | -0.02
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.
2.52%
Positive revenue growth while 8402.HK is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-72.72%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
26.01%
Positive EBIT growth while 8402.HK is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
34.66%
Positive operating income growth while 8402.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
72.54%
Positive net income growth while 8402.HK is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
69.36%
Positive EPS growth while 8402.HK is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
69.94%
Positive diluted EPS growth while 8402.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-9.91%
Share reduction while 8402.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-8.02%
Reduced diluted shares while 8402.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
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.
-38.20%
Negative 5Y CAGR while 8402.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-22.99%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while 8402.HK is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while 8402.HK stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-116.28%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while 8402.HK is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-366.90%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
31.24%
Equity/share CAGR of 31.24% while 8402.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
-11.27%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
-45.06%
We cut SG&A while 8402.HK invests at 64.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.