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.
34.63%
Revenue growth above 1.5x SAND's 2.71%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
34.63%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x SAND's 13.91%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
315.91%
EBIT growth above 1.5x SAND's 26.92%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
315.91%
Operating income growth above 1.5x SAND's 8.63%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
460.42%
Net income growth above 1.5x SAND's 47.17%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
-266.00%
Negative EPS growth while SAND is at 50.56%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-266.00%
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.
4117.61%
Positive OCF growth while SAND is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
4117.61%
Positive FCF growth while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
48.45%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 34.25%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
48.45%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 75.49%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
-24.46%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
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.
3.15%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SAND's 18.98%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
7.29%
Inventory growth of 7.29% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
13.98%
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.
15.09%
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.
4.37%
SG&A growth well above SAND's 2.94%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.