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.
23.44%
Revenue growth above 1.5x FSM's 9.92%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
60.21%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x FSM's 22.90%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-31.17%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-33.15%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-43.00%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-44.12%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-44.12%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.25%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
0.01%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x FSM's 20.16%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
0.19%
Dividend growth of 0.19% while FSM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
25.61%
OCF growth under 50% of FSM's 61.84%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-8.90%
Negative FCF growth while FSM is at 106.77%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
121.58%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 230.85%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
68.26%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 128.78%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
35.77%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of FSM's 43.09%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
177.46%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FSM's 569.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
139.14%
Below 50% of FSM's 343.64%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
62.38%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FSM's 148.11%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
38.48%
Below 50% of FSM's 8141.21%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
12.23%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-70.02%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
63.53%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 113.17%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
34.54%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FSM's 15.38%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
15.29%
Positive short-term equity growth while FSM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
235.15%
Dividend/share CAGR of 235.15% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
103.88%
Dividend/share CAGR of 103.88% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
21.23%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 21.23% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-47.47%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.52%
Asset growth well under 50% of FSM's 1.53%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
0.24%
Under 50% of FSM's 1.96%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-8.70%
We’re deleveraging while FSM stands at 2.71%. 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.
-11.40%
We cut SG&A while FSM invests at 31.52%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.