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
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.
3.44%
Positive revenue growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.52%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
3.37%
Positive EBIT growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
3.37%
Positive operating income growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
116.27%
Positive net income growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
116.67%
Positive EPS growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
116.67%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.06%
Dividend growth under 50% of AEM's 5.79%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
-2.98%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-154.52%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
13.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 45.55%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
5.51%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 74.74%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
39.64%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 68.51%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
-6.33%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AEM stands at 38.47%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
9.59%
Below 50% of AEM's 99.46%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
77.68%
3Y OCF/share CAGR similar to AEM's 78.15%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from a rising tide or parallel expansions.
58.27%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 111.94%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
2532.91%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 50.83%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
4117.56%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 124.94%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
84.86%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 30.43%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
24.04%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with AEM's 22.36%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
19.25%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of AEM's 25.51%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
41.31%
Below 50% of AEM's 89.44%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
147.79%
5Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 215.26%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging policy in mid-term shareholder returns.
64.03%
Below 50% of AEM's 219.03%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
7.97%
Our AR growth while AEM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
42.63%
Inventory growth well above AEM's 0.06%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
4.12%
Asset growth above 1.5x AEM's 1.35%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
4.09%
BV/share growth above 1.5x AEM's 1.20%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-6.08%
We’re deleveraging while AEM stands at 0.30%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
16.95%
SG&A growth well above AEM's 9.95%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.