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.
22.39%
Revenue growth under 50% of ANO.AX's 62.13%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
9.26%
Gross profit growth under 50% of ANO.AX's 251.94%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-4.78%
Negative EBIT growth while ANO.AX is at 155.25%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-4.78%
Negative operating income growth while ANO.AX is at 648.74%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-45.78%
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.
-6.74%
Share reduction while ANO.AX is at 0.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-6.33%
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.
-124.17%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
37.44%
Positive FCF growth while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-67.18%
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.
1.70%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
23.51%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ANO.AX's 6.96%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
88.10%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ANO.AX's 77.99%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
-117.41%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-124.87%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ANO.AX stands at 878.66%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
106.06%
Below 50% of ANO.AX's 4293.06%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
133.33%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
100.00%
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.
9648.54%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ANO.AX's 53.02%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
260.24%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ANO.AX's 0.05%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
4.39%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. ANO.AX's 53.52%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-11.17%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.02%
Asset growth well under 50% of ANO.AX's 3.20%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
13.30%
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.
2.27%
We have some new debt while ANO.AX reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-100.00%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
17.47%
SG&A growth well above ANO.AX's 14.86%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.