111.48 - 114.40
76.75 - 114.40
5.09M / 4.23M (Avg.)
23.96 | 4.77
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.
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.
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.
-10.57%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while JHX stands at 42.83%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
28.62%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of JHX's 56.35%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
21.92%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to JHX's 20.47%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
41.80%
Below 50% of JHX's 91.51%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-10.75%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while JHX stands at 41.14%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-40.42%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while JHX is at 268.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
671.79%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x JHX's 340.16%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
685.96%
Positive short-term CAGR while JHX is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-24.85%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
31.40%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while JHX is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
18.22%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of JHX's 29.49%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
9.31%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while JHX is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
45.93%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while JHX cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder 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.
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.