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.
22.39%
Positive revenue growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
9.26%
Positive gross profit growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-4.78%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-4.78%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-45.78%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-50.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-50.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-6.74%
Share reduction while LBL.AX is at 2.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-6.33%
Reduced diluted shares while LBL.AX is at 2.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-124.17%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
37.44%
Positive FCF growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-67.18%
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.
1.70%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of LBL.AX's 46.12%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
23.51%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to LBL.AX's 25.81%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
88.10%
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.
-117.41%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while LBL.AX is at 30.04%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-124.87%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
106.06%
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.
133.33%
Positive 5Y CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
100.00%
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.
9648.54%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 188.95%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
260.24%
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.
4.39%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. LBL.AX's 32.45%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-11.17%
Inventory is declining while LBL.AX stands at 6.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
0.02%
Positive asset growth while LBL.AX is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
13.30%
Positive BV/share change while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
2.27%
We have some new debt while LBL.AX reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-100.00%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
17.47%
SG&A growth well above LBL.AX's 28.87%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.