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.
-62.12%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-4.76%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-133.92%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-133.92%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-104.47%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-100.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-100.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-3.68%
Share reduction while LBL.AX is at 2.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-7.83%
Reduced diluted shares while LBL.AX is at 2.48%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while LBL.AX stands at 9.16%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
49.89%
Positive OCF growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
180.79%
Positive FCF growth while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-12.63%
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.
66.44%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x LBL.AX's 46.12%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
68.94%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 25.81%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
992.35%
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.
163.21%
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.
1886.98%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-158.18%
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.
-105.95%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
69.70%
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.
164.53%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of LBL.AX's 188.95%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
90.05%
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.
-63.41%
Firm’s AR is declining while LBL.AX shows 32.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-10.39%
Inventory is declining while LBL.AX stands at 6.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
9.77%
Positive asset growth while LBL.AX is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.75%
Positive BV/share change while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-13.80%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-5.29%
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.