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.
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 LBL.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-0.00%
Negative operating income growth while LBL.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-0.00%
Negative net income growth while LBL.AX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-33.33%
Negative EPS growth while LBL.AX is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-33.33%
Negative diluted EPS growth while LBL.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 LBL.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 LBL.AX is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
-68.05%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while LBL.AX stands at 286.46%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-25.04%
Negative 5Y CAGR while LBL.AX stands at 15.95%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
8.04%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 4.36%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
122.08%
OCF/share CAGR of 122.08% while LBL.AX is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
232.93%
OCF/share CAGR of 232.93% while LBL.AX is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
298.27%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
125.52%
Positive 10Y CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
624.30%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
183.28%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 95.09%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
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 LBL.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 LBL.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 LBL.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.