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 XRF.AX 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 XRF.AX stands at 13.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-50.00%
Negative EPS growth while XRF.AX is at 12.54%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-33.33%
Negative diluted EPS growth while XRF.AX is at 12.54%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
8.39%
Share count expansion well above XRF.AX's 1.21%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-8.85%
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.
-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%
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.
36.85%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of XRF.AX's 74.52%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
45.47%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to XRF.AX's 49.22%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
646.76%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x XRF.AX's 132.15%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
99.23%
Below 50% of XRF.AX's 1139.05%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
281.81%
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.
124.64%
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.
-20.00%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while XRF.AX is 195.12%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
100.00%
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.
190.38%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x XRF.AX's 52.04%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
33.42%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to XRF.AX's 30.57%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
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%
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.
-16.74%
Inventory is declining while XRF.AX stands at 4.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-14.48%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-15.79%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-5.14%
We’re deleveraging while XRF.AX stands at 35.08%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-100.00%
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.
1578.79%
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.