10.50 - 11.12
3.81 - 12.83
1.80M / 1.61M (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%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-162.94%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
50.84%
Net income growth above 1.5x FURY's 18.38%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
66.67%
EPS growth above 1.5x FURY's 42.32%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
66.67%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x FURY's 42.32%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
25.71%
Share count expansion well above FURY's 41.16%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
25.72%
Diluted share count expanding well above FURY's 41.16%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-307.65%
Negative OCF growth while FURY is at 16.21%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-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%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while FURY is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
86.34%
Positive OCF/share growth while FURY is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
49.53%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FURY is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
96.51%
Positive 10Y CAGR while FURY is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
99.13%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FURY is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
95.94%
Positive short-term CAGR while FURY is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-81.58%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while FURY stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-67.38%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FURY is at 223.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-63.19%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while FURY is at 130.71%. 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.
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 FURY's 1.58%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
86.57%
Positive BV/share change while FURY is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
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%
We cut SG&A while FURY invests at 34.71%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.