10.50 - 11.12
3.81 - 12.83
1.80M / 1.60M (Avg.)
158.14 | 0.07
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-162.94%
Negative EBIT growth while CGAU is at 611.43%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-162.94%
Negative operating income growth while CGAU is at 611.43%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
50.84%
Net income growth under 50% of CGAU's 459.53%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
66.67%
EPS growth under 50% of CGAU's 455.65%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
66.67%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of CGAU's 455.65%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
25.71%
Share change of 25.71% while CGAU is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
25.72%
Diluted share change of 25.72% while CGAU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-307.65%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-945.45%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
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.
22.20%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of CGAU's 224.47%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
86.34%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x CGAU's 57.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
49.53%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of CGAU's 1173.73%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
96.51%
Below 50% of CGAU's 205.00%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
99.13%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CGAU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
95.94%
Below 50% of CGAU's 377.49%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
-81.58%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CGAU stands at 113.61%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-67.38%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CGAU is at 32.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-63.19%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
72.73%
Asset growth above 1.5x CGAU's 2.71%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
86.57%
BV/share growth above 1.5x CGAU's 2.43%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-32.91%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.