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.
18.01%
Positive revenue growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
42.43%
Positive gross profit growth while FSM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
173.43%
Positive EBIT growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
173.43%
Positive operating income growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
160.92%
Positive net income growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
160.71%
Positive EPS growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
160.71%
Positive diluted EPS growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.23%
Slight or no buybacks while FSM is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.31%
Slight or no buyback while FSM is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-48.78%
Dividend reduction while FSM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
30.24%
Positive OCF growth while FSM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
30.44%
Positive FCF growth while FSM is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
124.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 178.68%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
8.13%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to FSM's 8.94%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
-5.44%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
119.98%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FSM's 334.87%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-5.19%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-13.15%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
58.76%
Positive 10Y CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
1255.10%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-9.73%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
121.53%
Below 50% of FSM's 243.81%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
15.88%
Below 50% of FSM's 87.78%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
3.35%
Below 50% of FSM's 37.49%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
45.92%
Dividend/share CAGR of 45.92% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
66.54%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 66.54% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
156.25%
Our AR growth while FSM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.29%
Asset growth well under 50% of FSM's 5.85%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.52%
50-75% of FSM's 2.79%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-7.47%
We’re deleveraging while FSM stands at 59.52%. 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.
7.56%
We expand SG&A while FSM cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.