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 / 5.95M (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.
7.31%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of GTLB's 10.01%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
9.29%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of GTLB's 10.58%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
8.01%
EBIT growth similar to GTLB's 7.47%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
8.01%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x GTLB's 7.17%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
11.62%
Net income growth above 1.5x GTLB's 5.33%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
15.38%
EPS growth above 1.5x GTLB's 5.71%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
15.38%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x GTLB's 5.71%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
1.02%
Share count expansion well above GTLB's 1.29%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
1.02%
Diluted share count expanding well above GTLB's 1.29%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-26.15%
Negative OCF growth while GTLB is at 347.32%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-40.72%
Negative FCF growth while GTLB is at 339.21%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
0.52%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of GTLB's 250.29%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
0.52%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of GTLB's 250.29%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
0.52%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of GTLB's 250.29%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
107.97%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of GTLB's 189.77%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
107.97%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of GTLB's 189.77%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
107.97%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of GTLB's 189.77%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
11.45%
Positive 10Y CAGR while GTLB is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
11.45%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GTLB is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
11.45%
Positive short-term CAGR while GTLB is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
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.
12.54%
Our AR growth while GTLB is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-32.82%
Inventory is declining while GTLB stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.76%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x GTLB's 2.14%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
0.47%
75-90% of GTLB's 0.62%. Bill Ackman advocates improvements in profitability or buybacks to keep pace in net worth growth.
0.49%
We have some new debt while GTLB reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
5.97%
We increase R&D while GTLB cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
2.44%
SG&A declining or stable vs. GTLB's 7.58%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.