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.
-41.24%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-44.89%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-73.94%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-86.49%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-69.08%
Negative net income growth while XRF.AX stands at 13.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-70.00%
Negative EPS growth while XRF.AX is at 12.54%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-70.00%
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.
0.93%
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.
-2.64%
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.
-185.61%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-187.98%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
170.06%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x XRF.AX's 151.40%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
-15.95%
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.
39.74%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of XRF.AX's 49.22%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
-428.17%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while XRF.AX stands at 132.15%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-180.20%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while XRF.AX is at 1139.05%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-72.79%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while XRF.AX stands at 144.47%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
498.00%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x XRF.AX's 198.79% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-40.20%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while XRF.AX is 195.12%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
99.33%
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.
935.04%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x XRF.AX's 74.40%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
82.81%
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.
85.42%
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.
11.07%
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.
0.58%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. XRF.AX's 4.59%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-2.85%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
8.13%
Positive BV/share change while XRF.AX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
14.17%
Debt shrinking faster vs. XRF.AX's 35.08%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-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.
-12.77%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.