PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
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.
6.35%
Positive revenue growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
8.67%
Positive gross profit growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
19.59%
EBIT growth below 50% of AMD's 342.86%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
19.65%
Operating income growth of 19.65% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this modest edge can become significant.
20.94%
Net income growth under 50% of AMD's 147.22%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
22.22%
EPS growth under 50% of AMD's 140.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
22.58%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of AMD's 140.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.03%
Share reduction while AMD is at 18.06%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.10%
Reduced diluted shares while AMD is at 2.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.21%
Dividend reduction while AMD stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
78.45%
OCF growth under 50% of AMD's 164.29%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
84.17%
FCF growth similar to AMD's 78.43%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
75.81%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
43.93%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
9.01%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
139.61%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
96.33%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of AMD's 110.35%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
31.16%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
139.45%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
81.78%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 113.09%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
48.33%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
32.52%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
31.35%
Below 50% of AMD's 176.77%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
2.49%
Positive short-term equity growth while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
1346.20%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1346.20% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
173.68%
Dividend/share CAGR of 173.68% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
132.62%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 132.62% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-3.27%
Firm’s AR is declining while AMD shows 11.58%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
0.40%
We show growth while AMD is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.51%
Asset growth well under 50% of AMD's 1.86%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.09%
Positive BV/share change while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.06%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-4.87%
Our R&D shrinks while AMD invests at 0.36%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.91%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.