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.
7.87%
Revenue growth under 50% of KGC's 25.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
18.63%
Positive gross profit growth while KGC is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-2.88%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-2.88%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-15.44%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-13.95%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-13.95%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.07%
Slight or no buybacks while KGC is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.09%
Slight or no buyback while KGC is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
7.85%
Dividend growth at 50-75% of KGC's 15.07%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in returning cash to shareholders.
11.35%
OCF growth under 50% of KGC's 176.40%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
142.65%
FCF growth under 50% of KGC's 425.76%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-35.57%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-4.69%
Negative 5Y CAGR while KGC stands at 35.53%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
4.75%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of KGC's 10.83%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-46.91%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
2.05%
Below 50% of KGC's 32.10%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
29.22%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x KGC's 19.08%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-26.72%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while KGC is at 96.69%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
218.14%
Positive 5Y CAGR while KGC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
112.27%
Positive short-term CAGR while KGC is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
69.51%
Positive growth while KGC is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
34.27%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x KGC's 29.66%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
24.94%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x KGC's 12.33%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
91.37%
Dividend/share CAGR of 91.37% while KGC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
78.81%
Dividend/share CAGR of 78.81% while KGC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
77.13%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 77.13% while KGC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
1.34%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. KGC's 7.95%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-6.70%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
2.62%
Positive asset growth while KGC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.51%
BV/share growth above 1.5x KGC's 0.39%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-8.41%
We’re deleveraging while KGC stands at 2.49%. 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.
104.71%
We expand SG&A while KGC cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.