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
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.
5.24%
Revenue growth exceeding 1.5x VET's 3.37%. David Dodd would verify if faster growth reflects superior business model.
19.71%
Cost increase while VET reduces costs. John Neff would investigate competitive disadvantage.
-7.67%
Gross profit decline while VET shows 8.25% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
-12.27%
Margin decline while VET shows 4.72% expansion. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-19.31%
G&A reduction while VET shows 9.04% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-81.82%
Both companies reducing other expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-4.76%
Both companies reducing operating expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry trends.
9.87%
Total costs growth while VET reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
22.50%
Interest expense growth above 1.5x VET's 0.04%. Michael Burry would check for over-leverage.
16.08%
D&A growth while VET reduces D&A. John Neff would investigate differences.
4.68%
EBITDA growth while VET declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-5.58%
EBITDA margin decline while VET shows 3.40% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-12.05%
Operating income decline while VET shows 26.46% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-16.44%
Operating margin decline while VET shows 22.34% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
21.28%
Other expenses growth less than half of VET's 45.60%. David Dodd would verify if advantage is sustainable.
-10.07%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-14.55%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-112.87%
Both companies reducing tax expense. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
20.83%
Net income growth while VET declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
14.81%
Net margin growth while VET declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
9.63%
EPS growth while VET declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
9.70%
Diluted EPS growth while VET declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
9.74%
Share count increase while VET reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.
10.17%
Diluted share increase while VET reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.