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.
-15.81%
Negative revenue growth while NEM stands at 25.18%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-23.27%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-256.60%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-256.60%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-317.43%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-315.38%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-315.38%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.31%
Share reduction more than 1.5x NEM's 43.45%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.30%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x NEM's 43.82%. 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.
-7.56%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-8.06%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
205.89%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
2.32%
Positive 5Y CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-12.59%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
176.09%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while NEM is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-14.51%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-20.28%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-552.06%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-257.57%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-302.57%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
161.66%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 33.66%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
17.18%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of NEM's 23.23%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
3.49%
Below 50% of NEM's 27.18%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
13.77%
Below 50% of NEM's 3102.89%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
69.37%
Below 50% of NEM's 3063.47%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-27.48%
Firm’s AR is declining while NEM shows 124.91%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-100.00%
Inventory is declining while NEM stands at 39.77%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-3.67%
Negative asset growth while NEM invests at 77.14%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.48%
We have a declining book value while NEM shows 23.30%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-7.41%
We’re deleveraging while NEM stands at 54.86%. 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.
-26.45%
We cut SG&A while NEM invests at 37.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.