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 / 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.
90.50%
Positive EBIT growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
74.50%
Positive operating income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
91.74%
Positive net income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
91.71%
Positive EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
91.71%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x TRAW's 23.81%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
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.
55.51%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x TRAW's 49.68%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
55.51%
FCF growth 1.25-1.5x TRAW's 48.93%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capex decisions or cost controls create a cash flow advantage.
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.
-103253.49%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-39279.54%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-22130.85%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-247692.89%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-3218.28%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-4231.04%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
4781.98%
Equity/share CAGR of 4781.98% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
636.42%
Equity/share CAGR of 636.42% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
374.63%
Equity/share CAGR of 374.63% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
-42.01%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-51.92%
We have a declining book value while TRAW shows 117.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-46.67%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-6.56%
Our R&D shrinks while TRAW invests at 20.61%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-79.23%
We cut SG&A while TRAW invests at 24.02%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.