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.
-20.40%
Negative EBIT growth while TRAW is at 14.51%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-20.40%
Negative operating income growth while TRAW is at 14.51%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-19.78%
Negative net income growth while TRAW stands at 15.61%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
12.20%
EPS growth at 50-75% of TRAW's 20.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
12.20%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of TRAW's 20.00%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
35.62%
Share count expansion well above TRAW's 6.68%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
35.62%
Diluted share count expanding well above TRAW's 6.68%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-10.71%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-10.88%
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.
-812.85%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
87.84%
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.
86.67%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of TRAW's 99.72%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
-1279.04%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is at 99.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
88.03%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of TRAW's 99.91%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
86.27%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of TRAW's 99.67%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
1371.24%
Equity/share CAGR of 1371.24% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-83.09%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-60.87%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while TRAW is at 100.64%. 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.
-9.71%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-34.03%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-19.69%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
7.98%
We increase R&D while TRAW cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
58.15%
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.