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.
-15.79%
Negative revenue growth while SA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-16.44%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-17.01%
Negative EBIT growth while SA is at 45.88%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-17.01%
Negative operating income growth while SA is at 45.88%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-17.73%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-21.88%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-21.88%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.02%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SA's 1.27%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.01%
Reduced diluted shares while SA is at 1.01%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-50.24%
Dividend reduction while SA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-15.45%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-32.66%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
5.30%
10Y CAGR of 5.30% while SA is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
17.64%
5Y CAGR of 17.64% while SA is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
-28.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
13.22%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SA is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
54.57%
Positive OCF/share growth while SA is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-25.62%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
18.59%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SA is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
235.00%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SA is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-23.01%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
61.85%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with SA's 68.71%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
29.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of SA's 46.20%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
22.22%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of SA's 26.90%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
46.20%
Dividend/share CAGR of 46.20% while SA is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
91.79%
Dividend/share CAGR of 91.79% while SA is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
76.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 76.29% while SA is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
57.36%
AR growth of 57.36% while SA is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-50.99%
Inventory is declining while SA stands at 16.26%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
0.02%
Asset growth well under 50% of SA's 0.65%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.06%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-4.44%
We’re deleveraging while SA stands at 7.01%. 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.
-11.84%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.