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 / 1.81M (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.
-5.65%
Negative net income growth while AEM stands at 188.28%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-9.99%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with AEM at -11.62%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
97.55%
Well above AEM's 167.20% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
-80.37%
Both cut yoy SBC, with AEM at -43.01%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-24.39%
Negative yoy working capital usage while AEM is 111.98%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
1201.96%
AR growth well above AEM's 309.98%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
100.00%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AEM's 212.55%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
-284.77%
Both negative yoy AP, with AEM at -8.73%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-84.71%
Negative yoy usage while AEM is 26.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
8917.28%
Well above AEM's 3.13%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
-11.81%
Negative yoy CFO while AEM is 4.63%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
1.80%
Lower CapEx growth vs. AEM's 10.64%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
100.00%
Some acquisitions while AEM is negative at -86.53%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pausing M&A or divesting while the firm invests in new deals.
82.91%
Purchases well above AEM's 55.48%. Michael Burry would see major cash outflow into securities vs. competitor’s approach, risking near-term FCF.
-100.00%
We reduce yoy sales while AEM is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-30.43%
We reduce yoy other investing while AEM is 9.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
2.50%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. AEM's 16.03%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
-3.50%
We cut debt repayment yoy while AEM is 96.85%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
103.42%
Stock issuance far above AEM's 19.35%. Michael Burry flags a significant dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach unless ROI is very high.
-100.00%
We cut yoy buybacks while AEM is 15.05%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.