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.
4.31%
Positive gross profit growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
8.25%
Positive EBIT growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
8.25%
Positive operating income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
12.55%
Positive net income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
15.52%
Positive EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
15.52%
Positive diluted EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
3.21%
Share count expansion well above TRAW's 0.11%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
3.21%
Diluted share count expanding well above TRAW's 0.11%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.46%
OCF growth above 1.5x TRAW's 0.47%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
18.52%
FCF growth above 1.5x TRAW's 0.16%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
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.
80.04%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of TRAW's 99.99%. Bill Ackman would demand strategic changes to close the gap in long-term cash generation.
77.11%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of TRAW's 98.87%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
-27.06%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW stands at 55.48%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
72.83%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 99.99%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
70.62%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 98.40%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
-36.68%
Negative 3Y CAGR while TRAW is 56.40%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
109.68%
Positive growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-48.78%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-45.28%
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.
-100.00%
Negative near-term dividend growth while TRAW invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-10.20%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-20.44%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-5.39%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
4.88%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. TRAW's 0.16%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-40.17%
We cut SG&A while TRAW invests at 21.48%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.