PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (ATNM)
1.780.01 (-0.56%)
1.75 - 1.81
1.03 - 2.41
122.5K / 296.7K (Avg.)
-1.36 | -1.31
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-109.95%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
62.96%
Positive operating income growth while AGEN is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
53.00%
Positive net income growth while AGEN is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
52.84%
Positive EPS growth while AGEN is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
52.84%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AGEN 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.82%
Positive OCF growth while AGEN is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
18.82%
Positive FCF growth while AGEN is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
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.
-253.14%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AGEN stands at 86.39%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-253.14%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while AGEN is at 89.34%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-34.55%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AGEN stands at 75.01%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-2662.04%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AGEN is at 80.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-2662.04%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AGEN is 84.15%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
63.01%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of AGEN's 73.39%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
-1507.60%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-1507.60%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-84.19%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AGEN is at 79.85%. 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.
-4.23%
We have a declining book value while AGEN shows 15.30%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation 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.
-65.79%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.