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.
100.00%
Revenue growth above 1.5x PAAS's 38.28%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
100.00%
Positive gross profit growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
64.36%
Positive EBIT growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
64.36%
Positive operating income growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
87.32%
Net income growth under 50% of PAAS's 451.64%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
87.33%
Positive EPS growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
87.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
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.
-292.20%
Negative OCF growth while PAAS is at 225.95%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-292.20%
Negative FCF growth while PAAS is at 37.17%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-100.00%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while PAAS stands at 129.96%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y CAGR while PAAS stands at 65.53%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while PAAS stands at 39.15%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1164.16%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while PAAS stands at 111.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1370.88%
Negative 3Y CAGR while PAAS is 124.16%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
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.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-7.08%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-4.75%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment 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.
110.89%
SG&A growth well above PAAS's 41.55%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.