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.
10.60%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of S's 12.50%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
12.15%
Gross profit growth similar to S's 12.19%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
3.51%
EBIT growth similar to S's 3.82%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
3.51%
Operating income growth similar to S's 3.82%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
8.91%
Positive net income growth while S is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
15.38%
EPS growth of 15.38% while S is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
15.38%
Diluted EPS growth of 15.38% while S is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
0.94%
Share count expansion well above S's 1.16%. 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 S's 1.16%. 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 above 1.5x S's 3.84%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
46.36%
FCF growth above 1.5x S's 3.20%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-28.72%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while S stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-28.72%
Negative 5Y CAGR while S stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-28.72%
Negative 3Y CAGR while S stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
85.08%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while S is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
85.08%
Positive OCF/share growth while S is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
85.08%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while S is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
13.77%
Positive 10Y CAGR while S is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
13.77%
Positive 5Y CAGR while S is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
13.77%
Positive short-term CAGR while S is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
171.36%
Positive growth while S is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
171.36%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while S is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
171.36%
Positive short-term equity growth while S 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.
17.31%
AR growth well above S's 12.21%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
13.94%
Inventory growth well above S's 8.97%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
1.37%
Positive asset growth while S 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%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
19.41%
We increase R&D while S cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
2.14%
SG&A declining or stable vs. S's 5.60%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.