PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
3.02 - 3.02
2.85 - 3.74
400 / 3.8K (Avg.)
12.58 | 0.24
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.
18.02%
Positive revenue growth while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
15.57%
Positive gross profit growth while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
251.12%
EBIT growth above 1.5x LSX.DE's 18.82%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
251.12%
Operating income growth above 1.5x LSX.DE's 6.23%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
24.37%
Net income growth above 1.5x LSX.DE's 14.09%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
20.00%
EPS growth 1.25-1.5x LSX.DE's 14.04%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if strategic initiatives like cost cutting or better capital management explain the difference.
20.00%
Diluted EPS growth 1.25-1.5x LSX.DE's 14.04%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic moves (e.g., targeted acquisitions, cost cuts) explain the edge.
7.82%
Share count expansion well above LSX.DE's 0.00%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
7.82%
Diluted share change of 7.82% while LSX.DE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while LSX.DE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-52.88%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-74.16%
Negative FCF growth while LSX.DE is at 2.72%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
64.62%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LSX.DE's 326.15%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
64.62%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
29.67%
Positive 3Y CAGR while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
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.
226.96%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
226.96%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
100.21%
Positive short-term CAGR while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
109.56%
Equity/share CAGR of 109.56% while LSX.DE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
109.56%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
77.45%
Positive short-term equity growth while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
39.31%
AR growth of 39.31% while LSX.DE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
9.16%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. LSX.DE's 154.84%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
6.04%
Positive asset growth while LSX.DE is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.22%
Positive BV/share change while LSX.DE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-12.02%
We’re deleveraging while LSX.DE stands at 10.84%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
10.69%
We expand SG&A while LSX.DE cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.