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.
-17.85%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-10.34%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-14.45%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-14.45%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
149.47%
Net income growth comparable to NEM's 136.43%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
148.39%
EPS growth similar to NEM's 136.36%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
148.39%
Similar diluted EPS growth to NEM's 136.36%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while NEM stands at 89.64%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-24.07%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-23.82%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
105.28%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-22.48%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
27.89%
Positive 3Y CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
91.05%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while NEM is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-39.41%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
17.79%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
23.01%
Positive 10Y CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-59.13%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
15.47%
Positive short-term CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
205.07%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 13.82%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
22.24%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-6.81%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
-61.08%
Firm’s AR is declining while NEM shows 39.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.80%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.53%
Positive BV/share change while NEM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-13.90%
We’re deleveraging while NEM stands at 0.74%. 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.
11.86%
We expand SG&A while NEM cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.