40.40 - 41.05
29.80 - 47.18
2.12M / 3.66M (Avg.)
18.02 | 2.27
Helps investors judge whether earnings growth is driven by sustainable operations or temporary factors. Consistent, organic income expansion can justify a higher intrinsic value for patient, long-term investors.
-58.56%
Both companies show declining revenue. Martin Whitman would check for industry-wide issues.
-10.52%
Both companies reducing costs. Martin Whitman would check industry efficiency trends.
-71.47%
Gross profit decline while VET shows 18.99% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
-31.16%
Margin decline while VET shows 19.02% expansion. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
30.49%
G&A growth while VET reduces overhead. John Neff would investigate operational differences.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
62.07%
Other expenses change of 62.07% while VET maintains costs. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate efficiency.
58.61%
Operating expenses growth above 1.5x VET's 3.47%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
24.00%
Total costs growth while VET reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
2.31%
Interest expense growth less than half of VET's 21.86%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
1.75%
D&A growth while VET reduces D&A. John Neff would investigate differences.
-83.08%
EBITDA decline while VET shows 16.44% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-63.95%
EBITDA margin decline while VET shows 42.34% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-119.12%
Operating income decline while VET shows 62.85% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-146.14%
Operating margin decline while VET shows 62.88% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
32.31%
Other expenses growth while VET reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-127.83%
Pre-tax income decline while VET shows 14.65% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-167.17%
Pre-tax margin decline while VET shows 14.67% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-106.39%
Tax expense reduction while VET shows 1181.26% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-133.89%
Net income decline while VET shows 3.57% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-181.79%
Net margin decline while VET shows 3.60% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-134.37%
EPS decline while VET shows 720.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-134.90%
Diluted EPS decline while VET shows 540.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-0.28%
Share count reduction while VET shows 1.12% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-0.55%
Diluted share reduction while VET shows 11.54% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
