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.
17.97%
Positive EBIT growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
17.97%
Positive operating income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
18.43%
Positive net income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
58.16%
Positive EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
58.16%
Positive diluted EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
96.23%
Share count expansion well above TRAW's 5.74%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
96.23%
Diluted share count expanding well above TRAW's 5.74%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
22.94%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x TRAW's 16.74%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
22.94%
FCF growth 1.25-1.5x TRAW's 16.51%. 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.
-567.72%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW stands at 99.95%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
90.81%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to TRAW's 99.95%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
89.23%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of TRAW's 99.67%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
-636.46%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is at 99.94%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
93.35%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to TRAW's 99.93%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
88.82%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of TRAW's 98.99%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
2271.09%
Equity/share CAGR of 2271.09% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-76.58%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-2.44%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while TRAW is at 114.26%. 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.
569.03%
Positive asset growth while TRAW is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
756.79%
Positive BV/share change while TRAW is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-16.19%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-15.49%
Our R&D shrinks while TRAW invests at 42.46%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-24.67%
We cut SG&A while TRAW invests at 43.55%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.