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 ECL.AX's 33.11%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
779.13%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ECL.AX's 33.11%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
73.36%
EBIT growth above 1.5x ECL.AX's 36.12%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
73.36%
Operating income growth above 1.5x ECL.AX's 36.12%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
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%
OCF growth under 50% of ECL.AX's 82.56%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
45.56%
Positive FCF growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-86.94%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-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 ECL.AX stands at 67.24%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
49.46%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
49.46%
Positive OCF/share growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
49.46%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ECL.AX's 174.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-100.00%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-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. ECL.AX's 35.77%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.