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.
19.82%
Revenue growth above 1.5x GFI's 2.54%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
26.25%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x GFI's 22.71%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
25.56%
EBIT growth below 50% of GFI's 336.23%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
25.56%
Operating income growth under 50% of GFI's 336.23%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
29.72%
Positive net income growth while GFI is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
33.33%
Positive EPS growth while GFI is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
33.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while GFI is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.01%
Slight or no buybacks while GFI is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.53%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x GFI's 1.31%. 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.
79.67%
Positive OCF growth while GFI is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
79.67%
FCF growth above 1.5x GFI's 30.11%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
45.84%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x GFI's 21.87%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
-25.79%
Negative 5Y CAGR while GFI stands at 73.51%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
24.33%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to GFI's 24.57%. 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.
569.66%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GFI is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1286.38%
Positive short-term CAGR while GFI is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
283.77%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x GFI's 51.81%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
-44.91%
Firm’s AR is declining while GFI shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-100.00%
Inventory is declining while GFI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.18%
Positive asset growth while GFI is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.26%
Positive BV/share change while GFI is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
29.59%
SG&A growth of 29.59% while GFI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees more spend on admin or marketing, expecting stronger top-line in return.