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 / 3.68M (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.
66.40%
Positive revenue growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
139.84%
Positive gross profit growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
337.00%
EBIT growth 75-90% of AR's 396.66%. Bill Ackman would push for cost reforms or better product mix to narrow the gap.
337.00%
Operating income growth at 75-90% of AR's 396.66%. Bill Ackman would demand a plan to enhance operating leverage.
237.14%
Positive net income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
222.00%
Positive EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
222.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
13.06%
Share count expansion well above AR's 0.12%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
13.06%
Diluted share count expanding well above AR's 0.11%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-21.03%
Dividend reduction while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
71.27%
Positive OCF growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
175.36%
Positive FCF growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-70.29%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AR stands at 1596.44%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-30.56%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AR stands at 77.23%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
246.05%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 139.40%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-74.80%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 203.43%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-36.62%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
569.07%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-23.55%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AR is at 107.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-33.47%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AR is 184.45%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
134.27%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AR's 106.44%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
-77.54%
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.
-21.07%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AR is at 100.46%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
25.10%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AR's 21.75%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
-95.48%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-73.17%
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.
39.31%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 39.31% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
5.50%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.29%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x AR's 0.24%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
-14.50%
We have a declining book value while AR shows 0.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
2.84%
Debt growth far above AR's 0.34%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-12.74%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.