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.
-116.92%
Negative EBIT growth while RVPH is at 5.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-185.87%
Negative operating income growth while RVPH is at 7.11%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-92.79%
Negative net income growth while RVPH stands at 5.90%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-3998.91%
Negative EPS growth while RVPH is at 7.69%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-3998.91%
Negative diluted EPS growth while RVPH is at 7.69%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-95.29%
Share reduction while RVPH is at 2.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-95.29%
Reduced diluted shares while RVPH is at 2.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
75.47%
OCF growth above 1.5x RVPH's 38.83%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
66.24%
FCF growth above 1.5x RVPH's 38.83%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
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.
-141.36%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-420.27%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is at 21.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-362.87%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH stands at 53.59%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-427041.90%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-659606.65%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while RVPH is 60.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-1088784.48%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RVPH is 58.01%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-4964.64%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while RVPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-1566.95%
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.
1993307.75%
Asset growth above 1.5x RVPH's 64.40%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
57821.37%
BV/share growth above 1.5x RVPH's 89.95%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
2.24%
We have some new debt while RVPH reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
178.96%
We increase R&D while RVPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
203.49%
We expand SG&A while RVPH cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.