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.
3.44%
Positive revenue growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.52%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
3.37%
Positive EBIT growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
3.37%
Positive operating income growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
116.27%
Positive net income growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
116.67%
Positive EPS growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
116.67%
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.
0.06%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while PAAS cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
-2.98%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-154.52%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
13.83%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
5.51%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of PAAS's 60.34%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
39.64%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of PAAS's 77.54%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
-6.33%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
9.59%
Below 50% of PAAS's 87.19%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
77.68%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of PAAS's 621.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
58.27%
Positive 10Y CAGR while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
2532.91%
Positive 5Y CAGR while PAAS is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
4117.56%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PAAS's 116.04%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
84.86%
Positive growth while PAAS is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
24.04%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of PAAS's 36.42%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
19.25%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of PAAS's 27.20%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
41.31%
Below 50% of PAAS's 296.34%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
147.79%
Below 50% of PAAS's 700.01%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
64.03%
Below 50% of PAAS's 185.75%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
7.97%
Our AR growth while PAAS is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
42.63%
Inventory growth well above PAAS's 0.49%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
4.12%
Asset growth above 1.5x PAAS's 1.13%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
4.09%
Positive BV/share change while PAAS is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-6.08%
We’re deleveraging while PAAS stands at 1.97%. 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.
16.95%
We expand SG&A while PAAS cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.