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.
121.05%
EBIT growth above 1.5x TRAW's 10.51%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
-6.92%
Negative operating income growth while TRAW is at 10.51%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
121.05%
Net income growth above 1.5x TRAW's 10.31%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
121.15%
EPS growth above 1.5x TRAW's 10.68%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
115.11%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x TRAW's 10.68%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
2.25%
Share count expansion well above TRAW's 0.42%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
42.15%
Diluted share count expanding well above TRAW's 0.42%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-3.22%
Negative OCF growth while TRAW is at 13.27%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-8.23%
Negative FCF growth while TRAW is at 12.73%. 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.
-39049.73%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-717224.10%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-12351.82%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
45138.86%
Positive 10Y CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
41496.01%
Positive 5Y CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
7331.25%
Positive short-term CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
8529.17%
Equity/share CAGR of 8529.17% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
2357.47%
Equity/share CAGR of 2357.47% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
2495.43%
Equity/share CAGR of 2495.43% 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.
135.47%
Positive asset growth while TRAW is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
131.44%
Positive BV/share change while TRAW is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-41.82%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-18.65%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
44.07%
We expand SG&A while TRAW cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.