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.
-47.69%
Negative revenue growth while ANO.AX stands at 62.13%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
0.48%
Gross profit growth under 50% of ANO.AX's 251.94%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-48.14%
Negative EBIT growth while ANO.AX is at 155.25%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-48.14%
Negative operating income growth while ANO.AX is at 648.74%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-64.13%
Negative net income growth while ANO.AX stands at 161.71%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-62.96%
Negative EPS growth while ANO.AX is at 161.29%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-62.96%
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.
-0.58%
Share reduction while ANO.AX is at 0.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.64%
Diluted share count expanding well above ANO.AX's 0.46%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-163.45%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-180.97%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
482.38%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ANO.AX's 223.10%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
546.35%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
314.68%
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.
-2943.31%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ANO.AX stands at 77.99%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-6929.20%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-250.99%
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.
2072.00%
Below 50% of ANO.AX's 4293.06%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
1593.94%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
469.94%
Positive short-term CAGR while ANO.AX is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
86332.39%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ANO.AX's 813.84%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
238.84%
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.
74.60%
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.
-62.89%
Firm’s AR is declining while ANO.AX shows 53.52%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
96.60%
We show growth while ANO.AX is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
19.14%
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.
20.81%
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.
111.67%
We have some new debt while ANO.AX reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
94.56%
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.