PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Metsä Board Oyj (METSA.HE)
5.540.04 (-0.72%)
5.46 - 5.56
4.95 - 8.28
1.3K / 2.4K (Avg.)
-277.00 | -0.02
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.
0.40%
Positive revenue growth while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.13%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
3.20%
Positive EBIT growth while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
3.20%
Positive operating income growth while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
4.89%
Positive net income growth while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
7.69%
Positive EPS growth while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
7.69%
Positive diluted EPS growth while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-2.60%
Share reduction while HUH1V.HE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.60%
Reduced diluted shares while HUH1V.HE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
8.87%
OCF growth at 75-90% of HUH1V.HE's 11.34%. Bill Ackman would demand better working capital management or cost discipline.
30.49%
Positive FCF growth while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-34.34%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while HUH1V.HE stands at 63.67%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-2.62%
Negative 5Y CAGR while HUH1V.HE stands at 16.97%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
6.36%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of HUH1V.HE's 8.71%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
515.31%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x HUH1V.HE's 109.90%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
16.93%
Below 50% of HUH1V.HE's 53.72%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-22.54%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while HUH1V.HE stands at 46.43%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
306.82%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x HUH1V.HE's 6.65% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
76.98%
Positive 5Y CAGR while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
18.81%
Positive short-term CAGR while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
28.48%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of HUH1V.HE's 51.21%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
27.95%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with HUH1V.HE's 27.49%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
20.26%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x HUH1V.HE's 10.47%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
-10.55%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-2.82%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
3.16%
Positive asset growth while HUH1V.HE is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
8.29%
Positive BV/share change while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.13%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.04%
We expand SG&A while HUH1V.HE cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.