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.
28.15%
Positive revenue growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
27.22%
Positive gross profit growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
334.31%
Positive EBIT growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
334.31%
Positive operating income growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
2587.67%
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.
-35.50%
Share reduction while XRF.AX is at 1.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-18.95%
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.
-76.36%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-78.87%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-73.52%
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.
-53.52%
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.
8.11%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of XRF.AX's 49.22%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
112.96%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of XRF.AX's 132.15%. Bill Ackman would demand strategic changes to close the gap in long-term cash generation.
374.44%
Below 50% of XRF.AX's 1139.05%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
298.40%
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.
124.44%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of XRF.AX's 198.79%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
130.79%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of XRF.AX's 195.12%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
183.33%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x XRF.AX's 72.97%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4378.96%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x XRF.AX's 30.57%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
165.91%
Our AR growth while XRF.AX is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
6.12%
Inventory growth well above XRF.AX's 4.59%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
12.43%
Positive asset growth while XRF.AX is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
116.00%
Positive BV/share change while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-45.25%
We’re deleveraging while XRF.AX stands at 35.08%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-50.01%
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.
6.62%
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.