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.
-5.73%
Negative EBIT growth while AXSM is at 23.84%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-5.73%
Negative operating income growth while AXSM is at 35.57%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.82%
Negative net income growth while AXSM stands at 19.26%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-5.05%
Negative EPS growth while AXSM is at 20.49%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-5.05%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AXSM is at 20.49%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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.
-3274.19%
Negative OCF growth while AXSM is at 25.25%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-3274.19%
Negative FCF growth while AXSM is at 25.25%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
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.
47.86%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AXSM is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
47.86%
Positive OCF/share growth while AXSM is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
47.86%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AXSM's 23.58%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
60.77%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AXSM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
60.77%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AXSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
60.77%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AXSM's 11.48%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
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.
-1.11%
Negative asset growth while AXSM invests at 7.23%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-4.64%
We have a declining book value while AXSM shows 35.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
8.65%
Debt growth far above AXSM's 2.81%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.08%
SG&A growth well above AXSM's 7.86%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.