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.
-129.30%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
7.42%
Positive gross profit growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
110.61%
Positive EBIT growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
110.61%
Positive operating income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
2444.00%
Positive net income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2720.00%
Positive EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
2720.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.03%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-50.00%
Dividend reduction while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-48.46%
Negative OCF growth while AR is at 7.56%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-58.78%
Negative FCF growth while AR is at 15.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-188.26%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AR stands at 226.56%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-146.64%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AR stands at 76.73%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-134.26%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
266.04%
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.
69.02%
Below 50% of AR's 266.41%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-1.09%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
771.98%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 196.15% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-61.67%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AR is 129.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
16.21%
Positive short-term CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
346.73%
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.
80.64%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 2.75%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
14.39%
Below 50% of AR's 31.02%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
956.98%
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.
405.76%
Dividend/share CAGR of 405.76% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
131.91%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 131.91% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-38.57%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-98.35%
Inventory is declining while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-36.14%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-33.43%
We have a declining book value while AR shows 1.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-45.47%
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.
-12.41%
We cut SG&A while AR invests at 24.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.