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.
-41.24%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-44.89%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-73.94%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-86.49%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-69.08%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-70.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-70.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.93%
Share reduction more than 1.5x LBL.AX's 2.48%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-2.64%
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.
-185.61%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-187.98%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
170.06%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of LBL.AX's 228.01%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
-15.95%
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.
39.74%
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.
-428.17%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while LBL.AX stands at 45.65%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-180.20%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while LBL.AX is at 30.04%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-72.79%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
498.00%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 196.67% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-40.20%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
99.33%
Positive short-term CAGR while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
935.04%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x LBL.AX's 359.09%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
82.81%
Below 50% of LBL.AX's 188.95%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
85.42%
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.
11.07%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. LBL.AX's 32.45%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
0.58%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. LBL.AX's 6.76%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.85%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
8.13%
Positive BV/share change while LBL.AX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
14.17%
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.
-12.77%
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.