205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.59M (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.
-11.16%
Negative revenue growth while MU stands at 1.71%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-14.27%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-19.78%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-21.40%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-24.91%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-25.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-24.83%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.21%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.21%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
16.89%
Dividend growth of 16.89% while MU is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-11.95%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-13.67%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
48.40%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 185.71%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
14.96%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 11.45%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
4.75%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 37.18%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
133.26%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 377.79%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
54.69%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MU's 60.37%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
35.00%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 125.83%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
117.46%
Below 50% of MU's 586.96%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
45.49%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
9.10%
Below 50% of MU's 399.03%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
21.96%
Below 50% of MU's 488.91%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-3.83%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MU is at 222.26%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-9.21%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MU is at 169.15%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
651.36%
Dividend/share CAGR of 651.36% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
165.01%
Dividend/share CAGR of 165.01% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
79.91%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 79.91% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-19.97%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-1.91%
Inventory is declining while MU stands at 4.34%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
0.14%
Asset growth well under 50% of MU's 5.61%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.66%
We have a declining book value while MU shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.20%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 19.16%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
1.85%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 2.81%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
3.26%
SG&A growth well above MU's 2.91%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.