PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Samsara Inc. (IOT)
33.600.80 (-2.33%)
33.44 - 34.57
31.40 - 61.90
7.61M / 5.87M (Avg.)
-152.73 | -0.22
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.
10.60%
Positive revenue growth while FLNC is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
12.15%
Positive gross profit growth while FLNC is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
3.51%
Positive EBIT growth while FLNC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
3.51%
Operating income growth above 1.5x FLNC's 0.65%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
8.91%
Net income growth above 1.5x FLNC's 5.89%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
15.38%
EPS growth above 1.5x FLNC's 4.76%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
15.38%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x FLNC's 4.76%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.94%
Share count expansion well above FLNC's 1.02%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.94%
Diluted share count expanding well above FLNC's 1.02%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
65.15%
OCF growth at 50-75% of FLNC's 103.92%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
46.36%
FCF growth under 50% of FLNC's 92.96%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-28.72%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-28.72%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-28.72%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
85.08%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of FLNC's 102.19%. Bill Ackman would demand strategic changes to close the gap in long-term cash generation.
85.08%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of FLNC's 102.19%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
85.08%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of FLNC's 102.19%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
13.77%
Below 50% of FLNC's 74.58%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
13.77%
Below 50% of FLNC's 74.58%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
13.77%
Below 50% of FLNC's 74.58%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
171.36%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with FLNC's 185.89%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
171.36%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with FLNC's 185.89%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
171.36%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to FLNC's 185.89%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
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.
17.31%
Our AR growth while FLNC is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
13.94%
We show growth while FLNC is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.37%
Positive asset growth while FLNC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-2.32%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-83.76%
We’re deleveraging while FLNC stands at 112.13%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
19.41%
We increase R&D while FLNC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
2.14%
SG&A declining or stable vs. FLNC's 14.40%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.