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.
40.53%
Revenue growth above 1.5x AR's 13.28%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
68.72%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x AR's 58.08%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
6650.00%
EBIT growth above 1.5x AR's 359.62%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
6650.00%
Operating income growth above 1.5x AR's 359.62%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
-177.89%
Negative net income growth while AR stands at 460.48%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-178.67%
Negative EPS growth while AR is at 458.14%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-178.67%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AR is at 458.14%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.04%
Share reduction while AR is at 0.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.04%
Dividend growth of 0.04% while AR is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
3.36%
Positive OCF growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-20.69%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-83.97%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AR stands at 470.41%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-42.93%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AR stands at 470.41%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-59.10%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AR stands at 31.67%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-86.82%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 141.12%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-61.04%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while AR is at 141.12%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
7.72%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 31.81%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-116.27%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AR is at 5787.93%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-116.68%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AR is 5787.93%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-188.12%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-75.09%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AR stands at 300.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-3.82%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AR is at 300.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-47.07%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AR is at 55.83%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
-92.82%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-92.79%
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.
-78.67%
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.
-41.02%
Firm’s AR is declining while AR shows 20.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.68%
Asset growth well under 50% of AR's 2.78%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-3.36%
We have a declining book value while AR shows 5.04%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.84%
Debt shrinking faster vs. AR's 6.42%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
10.18%
SG&A declining or stable vs. AR's 27.71%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.