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.
-62.12%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-4.76%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-133.92%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-133.92%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-104.47%
Negative net income growth while XRF.AX stands at 13.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-100.00%
Negative EPS growth while XRF.AX is at 12.54%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-100.00%
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.
-3.68%
Share reduction while XRF.AX is at 1.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-7.83%
Reduced diluted shares while XRF.AX is at 1.24%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while XRF.AX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
49.89%
Positive OCF growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
180.79%
Positive FCF growth while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-12.63%
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.
66.44%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of XRF.AX's 74.52%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
68.94%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x XRF.AX's 49.22%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
992.35%
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.
163.21%
Below 50% of XRF.AX's 1139.05%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
1886.98%
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.
-158.18%
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.
-105.95%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while XRF.AX is 195.12%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
69.70%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to XRF.AX's 72.97%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
164.53%
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.
90.05%
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.
-63.41%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-10.39%
Inventory is declining while XRF.AX stands at 4.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
9.77%
Positive asset growth while XRF.AX is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.75%
Positive BV/share change while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-13.80%
We’re deleveraging while XRF.AX stands at 35.08%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-5.29%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.