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.
-11.20%
Negative revenue growth while VTLE stands at 8.51%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-18.65%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-21.71%
Negative EBIT growth while VTLE is at 0.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-21.71%
Negative operating income growth while VTLE is at 0.38%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-60.51%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-60.19%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-60.13%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.95%
Share reduction while VTLE is at 83.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.13%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 80.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
3.19%
Dividend growth of 3.19% while VTLE is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-49.79%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-90.09%
Negative FCF growth while VTLE is at 80.84%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-27.22%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
83.80%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
31.49%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-61.60%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
12.84%
Positive OCF/share growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-23.15%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
60.11%
Positive 10Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
224.97%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
5.49%
Below 50% of VTLE's 70.63%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
7.74%
Positive growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-10.27%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
139.40%
Below 50% of VTLE's 1467.75%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-13.80%
Cut dividends over 10 years while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
158.81%
Dividend/share CAGR of 158.81% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
221.47%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 221.47% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-3.27%
Firm’s AR is declining while VTLE shows 21.56%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.77%
Negative asset growth while VTLE invests at 8.61%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.09%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
6.42%
Debt shrinking faster vs. VTLE's 27.84%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.27%
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.