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.
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.
-2.95%
Reduced diluted shares while ANO.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2963.60%
Negative OCF growth while ANO.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-174.00%
Negative FCF growth while ANO.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-92.95%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ANO.AX stands at 32.63%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-67.73%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-68.10%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-101.31%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ANO.AX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
94.53%
OCF/share CAGR of 94.53% while ANO.AX is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
-112.81%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ANO.AX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-111.55%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ANO.AX is at 83.83%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
81.82%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to ANO.AX's 84.74%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
19.58%
Positive short-term CAGR while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
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.
-9.88%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-1.24%
Inventory is declining while ANO.AX stands at 15.55%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-9.00%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
We’re deleveraging while ANO.AX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.