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.
-22.03%
Negative EBIT growth while TRVN is at 31.33%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-22.03%
Negative operating income growth while TRVN is at 31.33%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-22.30%
Negative net income growth while TRVN stands at 38.72%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-22.29%
Negative EPS growth while TRVN is at 40.85%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-22.29%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TRVN is at 38.77%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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.
-72.30%
Negative OCF growth while TRVN is at 11.87%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-72.45%
Negative FCF growth while TRVN is at 11.43%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
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.
-22389.18%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while TRVN stands at 15.80%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
42.89%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x TRVN's 15.80%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
64.68%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while TRVN is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-7255.64%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRVN is at 33.31%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-121.67%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while TRVN is 33.31%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
22.78%
Below 50% of TRVN's 57.58%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
5223.15%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x TRVN's 471.48%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
855.06%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x TRVN's 471.48%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
-50.27%
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.
53.46%
Positive asset growth while TRVN is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
59.08%
BV/share growth above 1.5x TRVN's 1.22%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.66%
We increase R&D while TRVN cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
40.35%
We expand SG&A while TRVN cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.