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.
-11.65%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-22.33%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-27.12%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-27.12%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
0.59%
Positive net income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2.40%
Positive EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
2.42%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.30%
Share reduction while AR is at 1.92%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.54%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.12%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
52.98%
Positive OCF growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
480.44%
Positive FCF growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-22.38%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AR stands at 91.37%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
11.78%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AR's 7.98%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
27.55%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-26.83%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
15.45%
Positive OCF/share growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
31.03%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-30.15%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
4.99%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
261.68%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 87.57%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-15.54%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AR stands at 66.96%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
7.00%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AR is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
155.92%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AR's 28.19%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
-12.18%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
227.32%
Dividend/share CAGR of 227.32% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
207.52%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 207.52% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-2.00%
Firm’s AR is declining while AR shows 5.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.13%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
1.97%
Positive BV/share change while AR is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-1.69%
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.
-14.44%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.