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.
10.44%
Positive EBIT growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
10.44%
Positive operating income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
10.28%
Positive net income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
12.12%
Positive EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
10.49%
Positive diluted EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
2.21%
Share reduction more than 1.5x TRAW's 17.64%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-28.06%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-28.93%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
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.
-4997.65%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW stands at 98.10%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
52.56%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 99.00%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
56.42%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 95.54%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
-10058.37%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is at 98.77%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
92.69%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to TRAW's 99.01%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
51.37%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of TRAW's 96.75%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
741.48%
Equity/share CAGR of 741.48% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
108.54%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-89.94%
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.
-17.83%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-40.69%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
499.58%
Debt growth of 499.58% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-14.73%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
3.54%
SG&A declining or stable vs. TRAW's 68.97%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.