1.90 - 2.15
0.48 - 2.54
9.88M / 2.92M (Avg.)
-0.48 | -4.19
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.
16.39%
Revenue growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 151.71%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
6.16%
Gross profit growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 102.04%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-39.85%
Negative EBIT growth while ACB.TO is at 21.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-39.85%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
2.92%
Net income growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 24.90%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
-2.20%
Negative EPS growth while ACB.TO is at 44.56%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-2.20%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ACB.TO is at 44.56%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
29.60%
Share count expansion well above ACB.TO's 35.55%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
23.80%
Diluted share count expanding well above ACB.TO's 35.55%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-62.19%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
32.43%
Positive FCF growth while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
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.
-90.89%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-90.89%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
336.85%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
228.97%
Positive 10Y CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
228.97%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
879.72%
Positive short-term CAGR while ACB.TO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
539.94%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 128.80%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
539.94%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 165.60%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
1391.78%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 448.56%. 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.
32.51%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. ACB.TO's 467.39%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
2.64%
We show growth while ACB.TO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
63.87%
Asset growth well under 50% of ACB.TO's 208.58%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
33.53%
Under 50% of ACB.TO's 408.49%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-4.80%
We’re deleveraging while ACB.TO stands at 28.98%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-65.35%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
26.25%
SG&A growth well above ACB.TO's 39.99%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.