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.
-1.28%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-0.16%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
7.61%
Positive EBIT growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
7.61%
Positive operating income growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-14.06%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
19.57%
Slight or no buybacks while ECL.AX is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
19.57%
Slight or no buyback while ECL.AX is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
30.09%
Positive OCF growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
26.35%
Positive FCF growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
424.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x ECL.AX's 100.49%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
-91.33%
Negative 5Y CAGR while ECL.AX stands at 76.55%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-48.01%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
93.13%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with ECL.AX's 100.80%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
-121.25%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ECL.AX is at 50.93%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
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.
-111.18%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ECL.AX is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
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.
-16.62%
Our R&D shrinks while ECL.AX invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-310.53%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.