PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.52 - 1.58
1.19 - 3.37
354.5K / 984.1K (Avg.)
-1.64 | -0.94
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.
-40.45%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
144.12%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x RUN's 32.69%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
83.79%
Positive EBIT growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
81.76%
Positive operating income growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
79.61%
Positive net income growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
79.66%
Positive EPS growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
79.61%
Positive diluted EPS growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.49%
Share count expansion well above RUN's 0.86%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.43%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x RUN's 1.51%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while RUN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-587.06%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-259.95%
Negative FCF growth while RUN is at 14.11%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-19.36%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while RUN stands at 250.30%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-47.70%
Negative 5Y CAGR while RUN stands at 250.30%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-16.30%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RUN stands at 114.39%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-89.40%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-218.55%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-93.69%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-644.33%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while RUN is at 276.44%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-79.81%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while RUN is 276.44%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-1039.85%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RUN is 214.92%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-70.19%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while RUN stands at 107.46%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-56.85%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while RUN is at 107.46%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-69.96%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while RUN is at 122.89%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
3.38%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. RUN's 52.23%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
0.51%
We show growth while RUN is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
4.23%
Similar asset growth to RUN's 4.41%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
139.76%
BV/share growth above 1.5x RUN's 9.53%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
0.20%
Debt shrinking faster vs. RUN's 6.21%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-4.70%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-10.20%
We cut SG&A while RUN invests at 18.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.