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.
-10.31%
Negative revenue growth while SLDP stands at 7.80%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-20.84%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
11.25%
EBIT growth below 50% of SLDP's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
11.25%
Positive operating income growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-11.48%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-25.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.20%
Slight or no buybacks while SLDP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-3.09%
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.
260.14%
Positive OCF growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
209.36%
Positive FCF growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-37.28%
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.
145.79%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SLDP's 1291.51%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
160.72%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SLDP's 142.51%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
127.83%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
278.97%
Positive OCF/share growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
253.00%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
193.55%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
123.72%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
3.87%
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.
719.84%
Equity/share CAGR of 719.84% while SLDP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
104.09%
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.
-91.28%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
121.34%
Inventory growth of 121.34% while SLDP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
15.40%
Positive asset growth while SLDP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
14.90%
Positive BV/share change while SLDP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-9.29%
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.
30.83%
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.