PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Metsä Board Oyj (METSA.HE)
5.640.06 (1.08%)
5.46 - 5.64
4.95 - 8.28
2.0K / 2.4K (Avg.)
-282.00 | -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.
-9.62%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
6.88%
Positive gross profit growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
12.52%
Positive EBIT growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
12.52%
Positive operating income growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-9.83%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-9.52%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-9.52%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.08%
Share change of 0.08% while UPM.HE is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.08%
Diluted share change of 0.08% while UPM.HE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while UPM.HE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
80.06%
Positive OCF growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
798.98%
Positive FCF growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
14.23%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x UPM.HE's 11.16%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
11.52%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to UPM.HE's 10.95%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
19.20%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of UPM.HE's 21.86%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
222.39%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of UPM.HE's 584.01%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
323.88%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x UPM.HE's 243.27%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
64.02%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of UPM.HE's 421.17%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
856.85%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 269.50% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
27.58%
Positive 5Y CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
218.95%
Positive short-term CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
162.49%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 63.22%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
72.58%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 39.17%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
53.08%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 30.79%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while UPM.HE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital 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.
-2.30%
Firm’s AR is declining while UPM.HE shows 36.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
7.14%
Inventory growth well above UPM.HE's 1.02%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.87%
Positive asset growth while UPM.HE is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-6.05%
We have a declining book value while UPM.HE shows 0.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.29%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-100.00%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-7.92%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.