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.
-1.41%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-9.76%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-6.19%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-6.19%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-5.33%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-5.71%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-5.71%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.14%
Share count expansion well above FSM's 0.12%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.09%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x FSM's 0.22%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.99%
Negative OCF growth while FSM is at 42.69%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
15.97%
FCF growth under 50% of FSM's 79.36%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
17.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSM's 84.91%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
48.43%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FSM's 43.26%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
57.84%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x FSM's 35.67%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-6.51%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FSM stands at 11.07%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
61.94%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 115.42%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
86.47%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x FSM's 8.47%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-17.41%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
115.73%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
218.03%
Positive short-term CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
76.72%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 143.11%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
24.80%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 47.40%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
23.93%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to FSM's 24.32%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
44.13%
Dividend/share CAGR of 44.13% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
119.91%
Dividend/share CAGR of 119.91% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
82.04%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 82.04% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-46.31%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
61.49%
We show growth while FSM is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.33%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.92%
Positive BV/share change while FSM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-9.45%
We’re deleveraging while FSM stands at 8.22%. 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.
-44.46%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.