PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
-0.17%
Negative revenue growth while NEM stands at 9.36%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
0.25%
Gross profit growth under 50% of NEM's 15.78%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
3.15%
EBIT growth below 50% of NEM's 16.13%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
3.15%
Operating income growth under 50% of NEM's 16.13%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
2.06%
Positive net income growth while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.22%
Slight or no buybacks while NEM is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.23%
Slight or no buyback while NEM is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
3.61%
Dividend growth at 50-75% of NEM's 4.84%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in returning cash to shareholders.
-7.33%
Negative OCF growth while NEM is at 52.34%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-7.91%
Negative FCF growth while NEM is at 113.50%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
88.45%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
31.69%
Positive 5Y CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-14.86%
Negative 3Y CAGR while NEM stands at 7.30%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
42.03%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while NEM is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
16.03%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of NEM's 31.76%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
-25.58%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while NEM stands at 23.16%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
16.64%
Positive 10Y CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
23.39%
Below 50% of NEM's 2202.36%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
603.37%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 206.26%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
136.18%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 20.13%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
21.55%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of NEM's 27.44%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
6.29%
Below 50% of NEM's 29.26%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
64.38%
Below 50% of NEM's 480.68%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
47.34%
Below 50% of NEM's 183.68%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
17.16%
Our AR growth while NEM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.31%
Positive asset growth while NEM is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.16%
Positive BV/share change while NEM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-13.66%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.41%
SG&A growth well above NEM's 5.95%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.