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.
9.51%
Revenue growth above 1.5x S's 5.79%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
8.67%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x S's 5.20%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-26.39%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-26.39%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-26.60%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-30.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-30.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.94%
Share count expansion well above S's 1.68%. 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 1.68%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
339.06%
Positive OCF growth while S is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
176.67%
Positive FCF growth while S is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
2.99%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of S's 454.40%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
2.99%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of S's 454.40%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
2.99%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of S's 454.40%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
112.47%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while S is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
112.47%
Positive OCF/share growth while S is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
112.47%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while S is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
21.93%
Positive 10Y CAGR while S is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
21.93%
Positive 5Y CAGR while S is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
21.93%
Positive short-term CAGR while S is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-1.99%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while S stands at 5491.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-1.99%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while S is at 5491.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-1.99%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while S is at 5491.19%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
-16.52%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-20.13%
Inventory is declining while S stands at 4.02%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-1.14%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-2.56%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-14.27%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
10.55%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. S's 2.52%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
15.51%
SG&A growth well above S's 13.95%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.