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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.00%
Negative EBIT growth while ECL.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-0.00%
Negative operating income growth while ECL.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-0.00%
Negative net income growth while ECL.AX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-33.33%
Negative EPS growth while ECL.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-33.33%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ECL.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.40%
Share change of 0.40% while ECL.AX is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
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.
0.00%
FCF growth of 0.00% while ECL.AX is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
-68.05%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-25.04%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
8.04%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
122.08%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
232.93%
Positive OCF/share growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
298.27%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ECL.AX's 167.57%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
125.52%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of ECL.AX's 177.67%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
624.30%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
183.28%
Positive short-term CAGR while ECL.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.
4375.96%
Positive short-term equity growth while ECL.AX is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
-0.40%
We have a declining book value while ECL.AX shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.55%
R&D growth of 1.55% while ECL.AX is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.