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.
-8.89%
Negative revenue growth while Technology median is 3.58%. Seth Klarman would investigate if the company is losing market share or facing a declining industry.
-8.13%
Negative gross profit growth while Technology median is 2.25%. Seth Klarman would suspect poor product pricing or inefficient production.
-13.11%
Negative EBIT growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would check if external or internal factors caused the decline.
-12.58%
Negative operating income growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would check if structural or cyclical issues are at play.
-73.23%
Negative net income growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would investigate factors dragging net income down.
-72.87%
Negative EPS growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would explore whether share dilution or profit declines are to blame.
-73.02%
Negative diluted EPS growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would look for the cause: weakened profitability or heavier share issuance.
-0.30%
Share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see a relative advantage if others are diluting.
-0.10%
Diluted share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see an advantage if others are still diluting.
23.81%
Dividend growth of 23.81% while Technology median is flat. Walter Schloss might appreciate at least a modest improvement.
12.02%
OCF growth of 12.02% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest positive difference, which can compound over time.
10.55%
FCF growth of 10.55% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a slight edge that could compound over time.
46.89%
10Y revenue/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 19.75%. Joel Greenblatt would verify if a unique moat or brand fosters outperformance over a decade.
42.24%
5Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 20.53%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company’s moat drives rapid mid-term expansion.
21.89%
3Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 9.44%. Joel Greenblatt might see a short-term competitive advantage at play.
88.82%
OCF/share CAGR of 88.82% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest edge that can add up if momentum improves.
100.89%
OCF/share CAGR of 100.89% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a slight advantage that can compound if momentum builds.
61.14%
3Y OCF/share growth of 61.14% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest advantage that could compound if momentum holds.
-36.54%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR vs. Technology median of 22.26%. Seth Klarman might see a fundamental problem if peers maintain growth.
47.24%
5Y net income/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 14.87%. Joel Greenblatt might see superior mid-term capital allocation or product strength.
-55.69%
Negative 3Y CAGR while Technology median is 11.56%. Seth Klarman might see a pressing concern if the rest of the sector is stable or growing.
44.34%
Equity/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 4.72% over 10 years. Joel Greenblatt would see if a high ROE underlies this compounding advantage.
6.56%
Below 50% of Technology median. Jim Chanos suspects weak profitability or questionable capital allocation limiting equity growth.
5.71%
3Y equity/share CAGR 50-75% of Technology median. Guy Spier suspects suboptimal short-term capital usage vs. peers.
516.71%
Dividend/share CAGR of 516.71% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees a minor improvement that could compound if the firm maintains consistent raises.
193.79%
5Y dividend/share CAGR of 193.79% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees at least some improvement that could compound over time.
82.37%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 82.37% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees a slight advantage if the firm is at least inching up payouts.
-18.91%
AR shrinking while Technology median grows. Seth Klarman sees potential advantage unless it signals declining demand.
2.57%
Inventory growth of 2.57% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss checks if we’re preparing for a sales push or risking overstock.
4.21%
Asset growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 0.44%. Joel Greenblatt confirms strong expansions matched by adequate returns on those assets.
-5.64%
Negative BV/share change while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman sees a firm-specific weakness if peers accumulate net worth.
13.79%
Debt growth of 13.79% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest difference that matters if interest coverage is tight.
2.93%
R&D growth of 2.93% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss wonders if a slight increase yields a meaningful competitive edge.
-0.73%
SG&A decline while Technology grows. Seth Klarman sees potential cost advantage or a risk if it hurts future growth.