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.
-184.01%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-178.81%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-184.01%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-184.12%
Negative EPS growth while GNPX is at 34.62%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-184.12%
Negative diluted EPS growth while GNPX is at 34.62%. 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.
-85.28%
Negative OCF growth while GNPX is at 7.14%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-84.23%
Negative FCF growth while GNPX is at 7.14%. 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.
-94305.07%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while GNPX stands at 91.62%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-10645.39%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while GNPX is at 96.48%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-26633.07%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GNPX stands at 96.26%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-5092186.63%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while GNPX is at 99.56%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-138877.64%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while GNPX is 96.58%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-184266.59%
Negative 3Y CAGR while GNPX is 96.48%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-96972.06%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while GNPX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-7412.05%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-5938.31%
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.
13.78%
Positive asset growth while GNPX is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-763.59%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-40.14%
We’re deleveraging while GNPX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
738.04%
We increase R&D while GNPX cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
40.95%
SG&A growth well above GNPX's 52.68%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.