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.
1725.48%
Revenue growth above 1.5x SLDP's 7.80%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
2308.06%
Positive gross profit growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
51.14%
EBIT growth 50-75% of SLDP's 100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
51.14%
Positive operating income growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
37.21%
Positive net income growth while SLDP 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.
-5.82%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-18.99%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
45.04%
Positive OCF growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
14.87%
Positive FCF growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-89.32%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SLDP stands at 1291.51%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-78.78%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SLDP stands at 1291.51%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-70.24%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SLDP stands at 142.51%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-45.41%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
580.42%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-101.15%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
23.00%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
87.68%
Positive short-term CAGR while SLDP 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.
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.
-11.84%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
7.77%
Inventory growth of 7.77% while SLDP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
0.48%
Positive asset growth while SLDP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1432.90%
Positive BV/share change while SLDP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
6.03%
We have some new debt while SLDP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-50.09%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
145.68%
We expand SG&A while SLDP cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.