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.
-37.13%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
225.85%
Positive gross profit growth while SLDP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-24.46%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-24.46%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-40.11%
Negative net income growth while SLDP stands at 11.25%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-50.00%
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.
8.39%
Slight or no buybacks while SLDP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-8.85%
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.
-93.22%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-96.76%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-36.39%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
36.85%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
45.47%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
646.76%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SLDP's 93.99%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
99.23%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to SLDP's 93.99%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
281.81%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SLDP's 93.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
124.64%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-20.00%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
100.00%
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.
190.38%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SLDP is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
33.42%
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.
165.11%
AR growth well above SLDP's 46.83%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-16.74%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-14.48%
Negative asset growth while SLDP invests at 2392.43%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-15.79%
We have a declining book value while SLDP shows 11959.80%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-5.14%
We’re deleveraging while SLDP stands at 13.10%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-100.00%
Our R&D shrinks while SLDP invests at 48.75%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1578.79%
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.