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 RGLD's 0.77%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
100.00%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x RGLD's 0.82%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
64.36%
Positive EBIT growth while RGLD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
64.36%
Positive operating income growth while RGLD is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
87.32%
Positive net income growth while RGLD is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
87.33%
Positive EPS growth while RGLD is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
87.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while RGLD 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 RGLD is at 11.02%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-292.20%
Negative FCF growth while RGLD is at 7.19%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-100.00%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while RGLD stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y CAGR while RGLD stands at 2499.89%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RGLD stands at 230.53%. 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 RGLD stands at 343.20%. 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 RGLD is 540.81%. 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%
Negative asset growth while RGLD invests at 2.30%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-4.75%
We have a declining book value while RGLD shows 2.80%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
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%
We expand SG&A while RGLD cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.