PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
0.00 - 0.01
0.00 - 0.02
1.30M / 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 LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
7.61%
Positive operating income growth while LBL.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%
Share count expansion well above LBL.AX's 2.48%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
19.57%
Diluted share count expanding well above LBL.AX's 2.48%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
30.09%
Positive OCF growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
26.35%
Positive FCF growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
424.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 228.01%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
-91.33%
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.
-48.01%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LBL.AX stands at 25.81%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
93.13%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 45.65%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
-121.25%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while LBL.AX is at 30.04%. 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%
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.
-16.62%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-310.53%
We cut SG&A while LBL.AX invests at 28.87%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.