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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.00%
Negative EBIT growth while SLDP is at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-0.00%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-0.00%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-33.33%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-33.33%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.40%
Slight or no buybacks while SLDP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
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.
0.00%
Positive FCF growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-68.05%
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.
-25.04%
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.
8.04%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SLDP's 142.51%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
122.08%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
232.93%
Positive OCF/share growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
298.27%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
125.52%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
624.30%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
183.28%
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.
4375.96%
Positive short-term equity growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
-0.40%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.55%
We increase R&D while SLDP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.