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.
-1.36%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
7.74%
Positive gross profit growth while VET is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
20.56%
Positive EBIT growth while VET is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
20.56%
Positive operating income growth while VET is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-92.95%
Negative net income growth while VET stands at 8.79%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-64.64%
Negative EPS growth while VET is at 10.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-64.64%
Negative diluted EPS growth while VET is at 8.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.96%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-62.50%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-708.16%
Negative FCF growth while VET is at 1383.08%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-6.27%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VET stands at 20.45%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
300.94%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 25.69%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
-9.00%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-67.83%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while VET stands at 134.04%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-80.97%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while VET is at 101.81%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-76.64%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VET stands at 29.84%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-87.90%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VET is at 135.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-68.44%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
179.97%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of VET's 274.30%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
6.74%
Below 50% of VET's 192.94%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-40.91%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while VET is at 44.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-41.05%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VET is at 36.45%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
70.89%
Stable or rising dividend while VET is cutting. John Neff sees a strong advantage in consistent shareholder returns vs. a struggling peer.
-66.21%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
-66.21%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
51.21%
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.
15.41%
Positive asset growth while VET is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.97%
BV/share growth above 1.5x VET's 0.34%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
15.15%
Debt growth far above VET's 3.29%. 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.
-5.69%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.