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.
19.14%
Revenue growth similar to VET's 21.14%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
34.16%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x VET's 26.91%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
163.86%
EBIT growth above 1.5x VET's 45.42%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
163.86%
Operating income growth above 1.5x VET's 45.42%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
125.64%
Net income growth at 50-75% of VET's 199.45%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
126.42%
EPS growth at 50-75% of VET's 200.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
124.53%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of VET's 196.67%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
52.13%
Positive OCF growth while VET is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
75.96%
FCF growth above 1.5x VET's 22.85%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
40.92%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of VET's 193.86%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-41.24%
Negative 5Y CAGR while VET stands at 33.61%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-72.36%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
164.63%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VET is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-53.36%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-50.87%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-26.73%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VET is at 118.97%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-90.82%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while VET is 43.13%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-85.31%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
148.96%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with VET's 159.69%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
5.84%
Below 50% of VET's 55.45%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-16.84%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VET is at 20.87%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
397.82%
Dividend/share CAGR of 397.82% while VET is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
101.84%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 11.75%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
-50.10%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
3.32%
Our AR growth while VET is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.81%
Positive asset growth while VET is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
0.44%
Under 50% of VET's 4.81%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
5.89%
We have some new debt while VET reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-50.74%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.