PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.90 - 2.15
0.48 - 2.54
9.88M / 3.06M (Avg.)
-0.59 | -3.40
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.
13.79%
Revenue growth under 50% of ACB.TO's 37.61%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-55.89%
Negative gross profit growth while ACB.TO is at 17.39%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-110.68%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-110.68%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-140.68%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-129.18%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-128.65%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
40.06%
Share count expansion well above ACB.TO's 21.55%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
37.54%
Diluted share count expanding well above ACB.TO's 17.79%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-4001.79%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
29.11%
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.
428.38%
3Y CAGR of 428.38% while ACB.TO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
-2160.23%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-519.63%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-44.26%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-325.17%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-1884.91%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-128.25%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
4744.30%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ACB.TO's 2323.90%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
5474.80%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with ACB.TO's 5663.69%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
1855.02%
Below 50% of ACB.TO's 6517.00%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-85.62%
Firm’s AR is declining while ACB.TO shows 58.98%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
86.58%
Inventory growth well above ACB.TO's 52.79%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
52.33%
Asset growth well under 50% of ACB.TO's 128.21%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
11.30%
Under 50% of ACB.TO's 105.36%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-20.34%
We’re deleveraging while ACB.TO stands at 65885.17%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
86.76%
R&D dropping or stable vs. ACB.TO's 177.33%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
55.94%
SG&A growth well above ACB.TO's 56.74%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.