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.
-19.65%
Negative revenue growth while SLDP stands at 7.80%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-18.11%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-140.60%
Negative EBIT growth while SLDP is at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-140.60%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-103.99%
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.
-16.26%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-12.92%
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.
-23.93%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-23.16%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-78.54%
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.
-49.63%
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.
4.52%
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.
151.16%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
407.95%
Positive OCF/share growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
31.81%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
98.36%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-146.54%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
84.00%
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.
1408.92%
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.
-0.38%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-7.37%
Inventory is declining while SLDP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.51%
Positive asset growth while SLDP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
39.13%
Positive BV/share change while SLDP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-58.69%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-100.00%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
42.47%
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.