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.
-8.81%
Negative revenue growth while SAND stands at 2.71%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-8.81%
Negative gross profit growth while SAND is at 13.91%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-197.39%
Negative EBIT growth while SAND is at 26.92%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-197.39%
Negative operating income growth while SAND is at 8.63%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-197.36%
Negative net income growth while SAND stands at 47.17%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-198.04%
Negative EPS growth while SAND is at 50.56%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-198.04%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SAND is at 49.43%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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.
-92.39%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-92.39%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
13.24%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 34.25%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
13.24%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 75.49%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
8.73%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
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.
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.
7.50%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SAND's 18.98%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
7.03%
Inventory growth of 7.03% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
3.74%
Asset growth above 1.5x SAND's 0.31%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
3.49%
BV/share growth above 1.5x SAND's 2.17%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
9.49%
SG&A growth well above SAND's 2.94%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.