PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Ovintiv Inc. (OVV)
40.910.33 (-0.80%)
40.40 - 41.05
29.80 - 47.18
2.12M / 3.66M (Avg.)
18.02 | 2.27
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.
11.20%
Positive revenue growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
38.86%
Positive gross profit growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
90.15%
Positive EBIT growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
90.15%
Positive operating income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-91.39%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-91.71%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-91.71%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
3.13%
Slight or no buybacks while AR is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
3.61%
Slight or no buyback while AR is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
94.37%
Dividend growth of 94.37% while AR is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-18.13%
Negative OCF growth while AR is at 7.56%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
93.40%
FCF growth above 1.5x AR's 15.38%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
922.82%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 226.56%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
317.03%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 76.73%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
148.58%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1593.56%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 83.73%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
149.24%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of AR's 266.41%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
28.04%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
18.73%
Below 50% of AR's 196.15%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-79.80%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AR is 129.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
389.91%
Positive short-term CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
716.56%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 24.95%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
256.54%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 2.75%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
105.09%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 31.02%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
1886.90%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 12.12%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
1566.52%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1566.52% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
856.44%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 856.44% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
22.23%
Our AR growth while AR is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
21.79%
Inventory growth of 21.79% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
1.10%
Positive asset growth while AR is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-7.09%
We have a declining book value while AR shows 1.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
5.85%
We have some new debt while AR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
29.12%
SG&A growth well above AR's 24.05%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.