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.
20.55%
Revenue growth above 1.5x FNV's 2.23%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
20.55%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x FNV's 6.01%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-8.75%
Negative EBIT growth while FNV is at 19.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-8.75%
Negative operating income growth while FNV is at 8.68%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-56.84%
Negative net income growth while FNV stands at 20.08%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-83.65%
Negative EPS growth while FNV is at 17.43%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-83.65%
Negative diluted EPS growth while FNV is at 17.43%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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.
-92.10%
Negative OCF growth while FNV is at 48.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-92.10%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
26.10%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 177.64%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
26.10%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 85.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
21.17%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 6.49%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent 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.
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.
-10.50%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
2.99%
We show growth while FNV is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.10%
Asset growth well under 50% of FNV's 5.52%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.57%
Under 50% of FNV's 4.86%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
300.27%
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.