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.
-30.55%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
1.96%
Positive gross profit growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-9.82%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-9.82%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-10.68%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-10.86%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-10.86%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.03%
Slight or no buybacks while MTDR is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.15%
Slight or no buyback while MTDR is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-0.03%
Dividend reduction while MTDR stands at 0.08%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-10.38%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
54.43%
Positive FCF growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
650.59%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to MTDR's 690.14%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
160.91%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 1272.50%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
29.84%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MTDR is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1708.47%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with MTDR's 1566.28%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
102.79%
Below 50% of MTDR's 362.73%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
4.89%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1159.25%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MTDR's 163.75% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
435.30%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MTDR's 139.65%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-14.12%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
885.58%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MTDR's 274.37%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
231.59%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MTDR's 204.54%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
85.42%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of MTDR's 101.40%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
1937.12%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1937.12% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
952.41%
Dividend/share CAGR of 952.41% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
516.82%
3Y dividend/share CAGR similar to MTDR's 529.33%. Walter Schloss finds parallel short-term dividend strategies for both companies.
-10.85%
Firm’s AR is declining while MTDR shows 2.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
3.08%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MTDR's 23.07%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
0.72%
Asset growth well under 50% of MTDR's 1.79%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.69%
75-90% of MTDR's 2.09%. Bill Ackman advocates improvements in profitability or buybacks to keep pace in net worth growth.
-20.40%
We’re deleveraging while MTDR stands at 0.54%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.86%
We expand SG&A while MTDR cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.