PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.75 - 1.81
1.03 - 2.41
122.5K / 297.6K (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%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-5.73%
Negative operating income growth while CRVO is at 22.28%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.82%
Negative net income growth while CRVO stands at 15.75%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-5.05%
Negative EPS growth while CRVO is at 17.40%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-5.05%
Negative diluted EPS growth while CRVO is at 17.40%. 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 CRVO is at 29.42%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-3274.19%
Negative FCF growth while CRVO is at 29.15%. 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%
OCF/share CAGR of 47.86% while CRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
47.86%
OCF/share CAGR of 47.86% while CRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
47.86%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 47.86% while CRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
60.77%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 60.77% while CRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
60.77%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CRVO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
60.77%
Positive short-term CAGR while CRVO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
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%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-4.64%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
8.65%
Debt growth far above CRVO's 1.81%. 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 declining or stable vs. CRVO's 34.30%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.