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.
-19.18%
Negative revenue growth while ANO.AX stands at 62.13%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-35.15%
Negative gross profit growth while ANO.AX is at 251.94%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-2.26%
Negative EBIT growth while ANO.AX is at 155.25%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-2.26%
Negative operating income growth while ANO.AX is at 648.74%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-74.84%
Negative net income growth while ANO.AX stands at 161.71%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-50.00%
Negative EPS growth while ANO.AX is at 161.29%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-50.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ANO.AX is at 161.54%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-21.50%
Share reduction while ANO.AX is at 0.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-18.24%
Reduced diluted shares while ANO.AX is at 0.46%. 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.
169.04%
Positive OCF growth while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
159.89%
Positive FCF growth while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-79.60%
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.
-73.73%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-42.67%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ANO.AX stands at 6.96%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
186.98%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ANO.AX's 77.99%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
11.96%
Positive OCF/share growth while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
688.12%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of ANO.AX's 878.66%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
113.40%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
45.44%
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.
-9.46%
Firm’s AR is declining while ANO.AX shows 53.52%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
16.00%
We show growth while ANO.AX is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
6.53%
Asset growth above 1.5x ANO.AX's 3.20%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
99.56%
BV/share growth above 1.5x ANO.AX's 2.14%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
15.85%
We have some new debt while ANO.AX reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-50.02%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
3.76%
SG&A declining or stable vs. ANO.AX's 14.86%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.