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.
32.96%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of AR's 51.15%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
39.42%
Gross profit growth under 50% of AR's 96.51%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
855.56%
Positive EBIT growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
855.56%
Positive operating income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
146.22%
Net income growth above 1.5x AR's 57.51%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
147.06%
EPS growth above 1.5x AR's 57.65%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
147.06%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x AR's 57.65%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.37%
Share change of 0.37% while AR is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.37%
Slight or no buyback while AR is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
30.29%
Dividend growth of 30.29% while AR is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
104.11%
OCF growth above 1.5x AR's 35.28%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
269.41%
FCF growth above 1.5x AR's 106.31%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
8.50%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 809.28%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-58.41%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AR stands at 809.28%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
12.78%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 809.28%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
5.78%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 170.94%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-47.84%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while AR is at 170.94%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
48.03%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 170.94%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-34.62%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-87.79%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
47.77%
Positive short-term CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-24.78%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-77.31%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-69.25%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
81.20%
Dividend/share CAGR of 81.20% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-82.78%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-65.53%
Negative near-term dividend growth while AR invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-19.48%
Firm’s AR is declining while AR shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-24.60%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-2.58%
Negative asset growth while AR invests at 7.88%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
1.32%
Positive BV/share change while AR is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-10.24%
We’re deleveraging while AR stands at 21.97%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-15.91%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.