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.
-12.35%
Negative revenue growth while 8420.HK stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
246.20%
Gross profit growth of 246.20% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal improvements could expand further.
143.45%
EBIT growth of 143.45% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can be scaled further.
143.45%
Operating income growth of 143.45% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this modest edge can become significant.
139.26%
Net income growth of 139.26% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate into a larger gap.
140.00%
EPS growth of 140.00% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
140.00%
Diluted EPS growth of 140.00% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
-0.01%
Share reduction while 8420.HK is at 0.00%. 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.
100.00%
OCF growth of 100.00% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
100.00%
FCF growth of 100.00% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-80.57%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-72.79%
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.
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.
132.15%
Positive 5Y CAGR while 8420.HK is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
104.60%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to 8420.HK's 100.00%. 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.
7.31%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. 8420.HK's 81.76%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.63%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
3.09%
Positive BV/share change while 8420.HK is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-30.06%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
33.09%
SG&A growth of 33.09% while 8420.HK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees more spend on admin or marketing, expecting stronger top-line in return.