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.
-1.20%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
21.97%
Positive gross profit growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
42.63%
Positive EBIT growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
42.63%
Positive operating income growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
1968.89%
Positive net income growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2385.71%
Positive EPS growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
2450.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-19.18%
Share reduction while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-18.90%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
86.34%
Dividend growth of 86.34% while VTLE is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-54.38%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-242.61%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
114.98%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
114.98%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 20.03%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
114.98%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
103.79%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
103.79%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 25.81%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
103.79%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
195.52%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 58.99% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
195.52%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 67.00%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
195.52%
Positive short-term CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
67.87%
Positive growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
67.87%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with VTLE's 73.01%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
67.87%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 38.15%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
89.40%
Dividend/share CAGR of 89.40% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
89.40%
Dividend/share CAGR of 89.40% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
89.40%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 89.40% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
37.86%
Our AR growth while VTLE is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
103.35%
Inventory growth of 103.35% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
-3.30%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
23.70%
Positive BV/share change while VTLE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-8.94%
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.
-5.18%
We cut SG&A while VTLE invests at 51.85%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.