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.
-2.48%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
56.29%
Positive gross profit growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
100.00%
Positive EBIT growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
674.16%
Positive operating income growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
293.08%
Positive net income growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
295.08%
Positive EPS growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
293.44%
Positive diluted EPS growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.54%
Share reduction while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.12%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.75%
Dividend reduction while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-100.00%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-303.52%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
81.41%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
220.27%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 20.03%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
-38.39%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-100.00%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE is at 25.81%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-100.00%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
112.39%
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.
107.03%
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.
-77.53%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-13.77%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
77.24%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with VTLE's 73.01%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
77.03%
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.
35.18%
Dividend/share CAGR of 35.18% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
208.95%
Dividend/share CAGR of 208.95% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
19.48%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 19.48% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-100.00%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
272.06%
Positive asset growth while VTLE is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
3.50%
Positive BV/share change while VTLE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.50%
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.
-100.00%
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.