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.
-5.01%
Negative revenue growth while AR stands at 3.12%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.20%
Negative gross profit growth while AR is at 0.25%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-9.43%
Negative EBIT growth while AR is at 29.21%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-9.43%
Negative operating income growth while AR is at 29.21%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-12.60%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-10.98%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-11.13%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.83%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.69%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-5.60%
Dividend reduction while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-28.42%
Negative OCF growth while AR is at 17.88%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-45.86%
Negative FCF growth while AR is at 19.27%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
101.88%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 2787.88%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
217.71%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of AR's 254.35%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
98.77%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AR's 169.27%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
-50.89%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 1249.50%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
107.70%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 0.43%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
33.35%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 417.63%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
155.59%
Below 50% of AR's 450.39%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
210.93%
Below 50% of AR's 500.00%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
734.12%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 160.14%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-30.80%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AR stands at 195.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-27.52%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-30.81%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-76.47%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
226.56%
Dividend/share CAGR of 226.56% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
158.99%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 158.99% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-16.39%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
100.00%
Inventory growth well above AR's 5.57%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-3.68%
Negative asset growth while AR invests at 1.41%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
14.62%
BV/share growth above 1.5x AR's 5.88%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-7.25%
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.
9.78%
SG&A declining or stable vs. AR's 29.90%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.