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.
6.06%
Positive revenue growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
28.92%
Positive gross profit growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
380.62%
Positive EBIT growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
380.62%
Positive operating income growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
1164.40%
Positive net income growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.99%
Share reduction while LBL.AX is at 2.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
81.42%
Positive OCF growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-360.42%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-74.99%
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.
-42.26%
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.
-3.11%
Negative 3Y CAGR while LBL.AX stands at 25.81%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
145.92%
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.
26672.25%
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.
184.38%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
110.42%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of LBL.AX's 196.67%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
14569.42%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
10.26%
Positive short-term CAGR while LBL.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.
479.91%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 29.77%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
-56.88%
Firm’s AR is declining while LBL.AX shows 32.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
12.80%
Inventory growth well above LBL.AX's 6.76%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
35.81%
Positive asset growth while LBL.AX is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
3.76%
Positive BV/share change while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
15122.66%
We have some new debt while LBL.AX reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
92.32%
We increase R&D while LBL.AX cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-33.57%
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.