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.
-9.14%
Negative revenue growth while AEM stands at 9.02%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-3.04%
Negative gross profit growth while AEM is at 23.30%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-1.06%
Negative EBIT growth while AEM is at 55.05%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1.06%
Negative operating income growth while AEM is at 55.05%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-32.95%
Negative net income growth while AEM stands at 786.25%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-32.43%
Negative EPS growth while AEM is at 760.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-32.43%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AEM is at 757.78%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.07%
Share reduction more than 1.5x AEM's 2.94%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.08%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x AEM's 3.07%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while AEM stands at 5.08%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-21.46%
Negative OCF growth while AEM is at 70.73%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-60.38%
Negative FCF growth while AEM is at 1401.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-18.34%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AEM stands at 31.91%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
5.34%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 29.39%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-16.68%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AEM stands at 14.80%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-36.08%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AEM stands at 63.37%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
5.49%
Below 50% of AEM's 55.05%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-24.69%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AEM stands at 103.18%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-34.59%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AEM is at 2697.49%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
60.03%
Below 50% of AEM's 1904.72%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
16.20%
Below 50% of AEM's 4404.70%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
65.46%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 109.87%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
35.36%
Below 50% of AEM's 98.56%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
28.74%
Below 50% of AEM's 100.56%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-9.98%
Firm’s AR is declining while AEM shows 3.74%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-37.75%
Inventory is declining while AEM stands at 2.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.15%
Asset growth well under 50% of AEM's 26.18%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.34%
Under 50% of AEM's 18.34%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-10.20%
We’re deleveraging while AEM stands at 68.31%. 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.
6.88%
We expand SG&A while AEM cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.