PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
0.00 - 0.01
0.00 - 0.02
289 / 496.9K (Avg.)
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.
779.13%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ANO.AX's 62.13%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
779.13%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ANO.AX's 251.94%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
73.36%
EBIT growth below 50% of ANO.AX's 155.25%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
73.36%
Operating income growth under 50% of ANO.AX's 648.74%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
37.28%
Positive OCF growth while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
45.56%
Positive FCF growth while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-86.94%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ANO.AX stands at 223.10%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-86.94%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-86.94%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ANO.AX stands at 6.96%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
49.46%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ANO.AX's 77.99%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
49.46%
Positive OCF/share growth while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
49.46%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ANO.AX's 878.66%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-100.00%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ANO.AX is at 4293.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-100.00%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-100.00%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.14%
SG&A declining or stable vs. ANO.AX's 14.86%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.