PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
0.00 - 0.01
0.00 - 0.02
1.30M / 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%
Positive revenue growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
2308.06%
Positive gross profit growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
51.14%
Positive EBIT growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
51.14%
Positive operating income growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
37.21%
Net income growth above 1.5x XRF.AX's 13.78%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
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%
Share reduction while XRF.AX is at 1.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-18.99%
Reduced diluted shares while XRF.AX is at 1.24%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
45.04%
Positive OCF growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
14.87%
Positive FCF growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-89.32%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while XRF.AX stands at 151.40%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-78.78%
Negative 5Y CAGR while XRF.AX stands at 74.52%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-70.24%
Negative 3Y CAGR while XRF.AX stands at 49.22%. 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%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while XRF.AX is at 1139.05%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
580.42%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x XRF.AX's 144.47%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-101.15%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while XRF.AX is at 198.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
23.00%
Below 50% of XRF.AX's 195.12%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
87.68%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x XRF.AX's 72.97%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
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 well above XRF.AX's 4.59%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.48%
Positive asset growth while XRF.AX is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1432.90%
Positive BV/share change while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
6.03%
Debt shrinking faster vs. XRF.AX's 35.08%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-50.09%
Our R&D shrinks while XRF.AX invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
145.68%
We expand SG&A while XRF.AX cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.