PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM)
96.701.20 (1.26%)
95.23 - 97.14
55.47 - 103.81
1.63M / 1.80M (Avg.)
55.57 | 1.74
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-17.73%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with AEM at -45.35%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
-5.58%
Negative yoy D&A while AEM is 8.85%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-16.14%
Negative yoy deferred tax while AEM stands at 267.08%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-3.30%
Both cut yoy SBC, with AEM at -10.77%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-129.02%
Both reduce yoy usage, with AEM at -674.85%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
-266.58%
AR is negative yoy while AEM is 187.78%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
172.76%
Some inventory rise while AEM is negative at -310.38%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
440.48%
A yoy AP increase while AEM is negative at -145.72%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
110.07%
Growth well above AEM's 96.93%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-44.47%
Negative yoy while AEM is 199.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-15.45%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with AEM at -30.46%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
-6.60%
Both yoy lines negative, with AEM at -1.69%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-100.07%
Both yoy lines negative, with AEM at -76.44%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
-16048.39%
Negative yoy purchasing while AEM stands at 72.94%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-100.07%
We reduce yoy sales while AEM is 18.31%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
157.57%
Growth well above AEM's 267.80%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-133.09%
We reduce yoy invests while AEM stands at 3.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
4.52%
Debt repayment well below AEM's 96.74%. Michael Burry suspects heavier leverage risk or insufficient cash generation to keep pace.
-92.39%
Negative yoy issuance while AEM is 11.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
92.39%
Similar buyback growth to AEM's 100.00%. Walter Schloss sees parallel capital return priorities or a stable free cash flow for both.