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.
0.83%
Revenue growth under 50% of RUN's 19.82%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
22.37%
Gross profit growth under 50% of RUN's 78.65%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
312.32%
EBIT growth above 1.5x RUN's 20.59%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
1056.53%
Operating income growth above 1.5x RUN's 20.59%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
255.43%
Positive net income growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
248.28%
Positive EPS growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
239.29%
Positive diluted EPS growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.84%
Share reduction more than 1.5x RUN's 3.10%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
13.53%
Diluted share count expanding well above RUN's 0.90%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
154.55%
OCF growth above 1.5x RUN's 8.37%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
139.78%
Positive FCF growth while RUN is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-70.49%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while RUN stands at 199.57%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-41.23%
Negative 5Y CAGR while RUN stands at 63.34%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-43.85%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RUN stands at 26.10%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
111.77%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while RUN is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
105.87%
Positive OCF/share growth while RUN is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
114.73%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while RUN is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
128.77%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x RUN's 7.16% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
185.94%
Positive 5Y CAGR while RUN is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
113.73%
Positive short-term CAGR while RUN is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-83.20%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while RUN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-72.76%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while RUN is at 406.15%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
938.19%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x RUN's 244.34%. 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.
-16.40%
Firm’s AR is declining while RUN shows 29.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
2.23%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. RUN's 17.82%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-3.02%
Negative asset growth while RUN invests at 3.65%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
22.02%
Positive BV/share change while RUN is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-16.43%
We’re deleveraging while RUN stands at 5.91%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-6.06%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
18.82%
We expand SG&A while RUN cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.