PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
-22.64%
Negative EBIT growth while TRAW is at 10.53%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-22.65%
Negative operating income growth while TRAW is at 10.53%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-23.20%
Negative net income growth while TRAW stands at 11.40%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-16.67%
Negative EPS growth while TRAW is at 51.52%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-22.50%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TRAW is at 51.52%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
5.52%
Share reduction more than 1.5x TRAW's 83.54%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.56%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x TRAW's 83.54%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-16.84%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-16.73%
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.
-6820.22%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW stands at 99.93%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
80.75%
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.
65.01%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 99.70%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
-4282.29%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is at 99.97%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
64.75%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 99.96%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
77.40%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of TRAW's 99.83%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
285.15%
Equity/share CAGR of 285.15% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-96.49%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-92.46%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while TRAW is at 101.70%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
-28.33%
Negative asset growth while TRAW invests at 35.48%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-49.30%
We have a declining book value while TRAW shows 0.50%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-8.76%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
23.04%
We increase R&D while TRAW cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
21.61%
SG&A growth well above TRAW's 5.61%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.