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.
28.40%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x AR's 24.51%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
81.45%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of AR's 146.96%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
60.76%
EBIT growth 50-75% of AR's 119.25%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
60.76%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of AR's 119.25%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
59.63%
Net income growth at 50-75% of AR's 113.04%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
59.49%
EPS growth at 50-75% of AR's 113.07%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
59.66%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of AR's 110.55%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
-0.28%
Share reduction while AR is at 0.05%. 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.
0.28%
Dividend growth of 0.28% while AR is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
45.84%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x AR's 38.24%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
164.79%
FCF growth above 1.5x AR's 36.82%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-39.31%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AR stands at 792.72%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-3.54%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AR stands at 213.31%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-5.17%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AR stands at 56.50%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-55.53%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 120.29%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
4.46%
Below 50% of AR's 47.68%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
46.32%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-730.97%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AR is at 1061.01%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
34.70%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-101.34%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-87.41%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AR stands at 233.63%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-59.50%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AR is at 0.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-57.18%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-90.72%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-59.95%
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.
28.73%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 28.73% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-14.75%
Firm’s AR is declining while AR shows 6.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-4.54%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-11.59%
We have a declining book value while AR shows 1.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-1.95%
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.
-77.70%
We cut SG&A while AR invests at 4.68%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.