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%
Positive revenue growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
779.13%
Positive gross profit growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
73.36%
Positive EBIT growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
73.36%
Positive operating income growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
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%
Positive OCF growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
45.56%
Positive FCF growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-86.94%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LBL.AX stands at 228.01%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-86.94%
Negative 5Y CAGR while LBL.AX stands at 46.12%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-86.94%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LBL.AX stands at 25.81%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
49.46%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with LBL.AX's 45.65%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
49.46%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 30.04%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
49.46%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-100.00%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while LBL.AX is at 196.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-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. LBL.AX's 28.87%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.