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.
-25.55%
Negative revenue growth while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-29.83%
Negative gross profit growth while SAND is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-19.91%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-19.91%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-18.31%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-10.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-11.11%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
4.01%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SAND's 22.21%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.11%
Reduced diluted shares while SAND is at 22.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-41.69%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-41.69%
Negative FCF growth while SAND is at 24.47%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
115.32%
10Y CAGR of 115.32% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
59.36%
5Y CAGR of 59.36% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
46.89%
3Y CAGR of 46.89% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
580.66%
Positive OCF/share growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
89.09%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
506.67%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
114.08%
Positive short-term CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
934.37%
Positive growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
1372.10%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
249.39%
Positive short-term equity growth while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
-83.67%
Firm’s AR is declining while SAND shows 111.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-8.63%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.58%
Positive BV/share change while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-27.61%
We’re deleveraging while SAND stands at 0.00%. 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.
-40.67%
We cut SG&A while SAND invests at 1533.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.