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.
30.34%
Positive EBIT growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
30.35%
Positive operating income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
30.26%
Positive net income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
30.58%
EPS growth under 50% of TRAW's 91.18%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
33.88%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of TRAW's 91.18%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.94%
Share reduction more than 1.5x TRAW's 1322.44%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
5.92%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x TRAW's 1322.44%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
10.50%
Positive OCF growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
10.43%
Positive FCF growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
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.
-10668.67%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW stands at 99.98%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
79.98%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of TRAW's 99.94%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
60.25%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 99.48%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
-3178.86%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is at 99.93%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
82.89%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of TRAW's 99.93%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
76.87%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of TRAW's 99.55%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
496.60%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x TRAW's 100.01%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
159.22%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-89.45%
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.
-28.48%
Negative asset growth while TRAW invests at 294.24%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-43.72%
We have a declining book value while TRAW shows 113.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
14.13%
Debt growth of 14.13% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-30.15%
Our R&D shrinks while TRAW invests at 14.94%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-30.87%
We cut SG&A while TRAW invests at 4.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.