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.
16.49%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of VTLE's 26.10%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
31.21%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x VTLE's 26.80%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
134.02%
EBIT growth above 1.5x VTLE's 85.01%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
134.02%
Operating income growth above 1.5x VTLE's 85.01%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
285.71%
Positive net income growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
282.76%
Positive EPS growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
282.76%
Positive diluted EPS growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.18%
Diluted share change of 0.18% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-31.12%
Negative OCF growth while VTLE is at 14.63%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-291.02%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
176.77%
10Y CAGR of 176.77% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
-52.12%
Negative 5Y CAGR while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-72.94%
Negative 3Y CAGR while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
537.27%
OCF/share CAGR of 537.27% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
-63.04%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-62.37%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
4.07%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 4.07% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
-92.90%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while VTLE is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-12.35%
Negative 3Y CAGR while VTLE is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
627.17%
Equity/share CAGR of 627.17% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
36.80%
Equity/share CAGR of 36.80% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
-10.95%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VTLE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
917.44%
Dividend/share CAGR of 917.44% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
208.07%
Dividend/share CAGR of 208.07% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-48.79%
Negative near-term dividend growth while VTLE invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
11.12%
AR growth of 11.12% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-33.33%
Inventory is declining while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
0.70%
Asset growth of 0.70% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
-2.38%
We have a declining book value while VTLE shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
5.11%
Debt growth of 5.11% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
38.78%
SG&A growth well above VTLE's 12.70%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.