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.
20.29%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of VTLE's 33.06%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
15.01%
Gross profit growth under 50% of VTLE's 112.55%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
132.99%
EBIT growth 50-75% of VTLE's 212.99%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
132.99%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of VTLE's 212.99%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
150.33%
Net income growth above 1.5x VTLE's 54.54%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
150.21%
EPS growth above 1.5x VTLE's 55.36%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
149.15%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x VTLE's 55.36%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.40%
Share reduction more than 1.5x VTLE's 1.84%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
2.39%
Diluted share count expanding well above VTLE's 1.85%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-0.40%
Dividend reduction while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
15.02%
Positive OCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
26.86%
Positive FCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-37.58%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 22.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
58.08%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of VTLE's 108.43%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
4.57%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-26.03%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
241.13%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 11.74%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
62.15%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
124.29%
Positive 10Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
152.80%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 79.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
52.87%
Positive short-term CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-86.16%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-51.37%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-54.42%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-90.76%
Cut dividends over 10 years while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
19.56%
Dividend/share CAGR of 19.56% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
19.52%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 19.52% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
40.60%
AR growth well above VTLE's 5.83%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.45%
Asset growth well under 50% of VTLE's 2.24%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
7.31%
Positive BV/share change while VTLE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-6.78%
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.
318.18%
We expand SG&A while VTLE cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.