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
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.
-75.96%
Negative revenue growth while FNV stands at 2.23%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-75.96%
Negative gross profit growth while FNV is at 6.01%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-97.83%
Negative EBIT growth while FNV is at 19.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-97.83%
Negative operating income growth while FNV is at 8.68%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
182.08%
Net income growth above 1.5x FNV's 20.08%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
183.33%
EPS growth above 1.5x FNV's 17.43%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
183.33%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x FNV's 17.43%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
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.
28.32%
OCF growth at 50-75% of FNV's 48.94%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
28.32%
Positive FCF growth while FNV is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
6.51%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 177.64%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
6.51%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 85.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
6.51%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to FNV's 6.49%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
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.
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.
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.
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.
-28.03%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
3.80%
We show growth while FNV is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-2.62%
Negative asset growth while FNV invests at 5.52%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.62%
We have a declining book value while FNV shows 4.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
339.85%
We expand SG&A while FNV cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.