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.
-7.94%
Negative revenue growth while VTLE stands at 17.64%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-33.60%
Negative gross profit growth while VTLE is at 19.59%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-162.05%
Negative EBIT growth while VTLE is at 5.39%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-162.05%
Negative operating income growth while VTLE is at 5.39%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-166.34%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-166.39%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-168.10%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.23%
Share reduction while VTLE is at 6.32%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.84%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 6.34%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
4.41%
Dividend growth of 4.41% while VTLE is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-9.31%
Negative OCF growth while VTLE is at 63.80%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-23.06%
Negative FCF growth while VTLE is at 769.26%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-51.65%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 10.23%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
203.26%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 71.32%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
25.20%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-55.80%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
489.53%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 21.24%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
14.85%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-166.10%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
77.75%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 19.58%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
1.25%
Positive short-term CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-86.86%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-47.70%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-55.96%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-90.35%
Cut dividends over 10 years while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
48.27%
Dividend/share CAGR of 48.27% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
29.89%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 29.89% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
8.12%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. VTLE's 33.83%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-5.28%
Negative asset growth while VTLE invests at 21.15%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-4.62%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-14.82%
We’re deleveraging while VTLE stands at 14.16%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
8.45%
SG&A declining or stable vs. VTLE's 61.41%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.