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.
-33.55%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-48.52%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-1010.00%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1010.00%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
5.68%
Positive net income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
15.01%
Positive EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
15.01%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
11.01%
Share count expansion well above AR's 4.41%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
11.01%
Diluted share count expanding well above AR's 4.41%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-12.29%
Dividend reduction while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-38.17%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-75.20%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-76.02%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AR stands at 587.27%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-50.46%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AR stands at 587.27%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-0.62%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AR stands at 587.27%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-64.83%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 271.29%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-70.74%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while AR is at 271.29%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-58.66%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 271.29%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-298.53%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AR is at 71.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-179.55%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AR is 71.45%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
4.91%
Below 50% of AR's 71.45%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
-40.28%
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.
-59.15%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
0.08%
Equity/share CAGR of 0.08% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
-42.09%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-77.93%
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.
-77.97%
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.
-20.11%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
10.89%
We show growth while AR is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-16.61%
Negative asset growth while AR invests at 0.40%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-26.01%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-12.14%
We’re deleveraging while AR stands at 7.86%. 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.
-6.80%
We cut SG&A while AR invests at 4.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.