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.
-20.58%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-40.39%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-41.75%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-41.75%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-63.52%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-63.08%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-62.83%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.29%
Share reduction while MTDR is at 0.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.63%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
13.73%
Dividend growth under 50% of MTDR's 50.26%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
22.06%
Positive OCF growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-11.41%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
44.06%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 374.00%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
54.52%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 168.14%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
2.64%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 47.71%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
88.97%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 389.13%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
122.94%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MTDR's 128.16%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
100.66%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 204.08%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
167.57%
Below 50% of MTDR's 588.54%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
156.51%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to MTDR's 149.21%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
23.02%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of MTDR's 27.10%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
0.40%
Below 50% of MTDR's 314.83%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-7.34%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MTDR is at 141.53%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-17.62%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MTDR is at 60.02%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
-75.18%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MTDR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
223.44%
Dividend/share CAGR of 223.44% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
170.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 170.29% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-16.29%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.45%
Asset growth well under 50% of MTDR's 4.10%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
4.01%
1.25-1.5x MTDR's 3.54%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
4.12%
Debt growth far above MTDR's 0.89%. 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.
-12.80%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.