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.
5.75%
Revenue growth under 50% of SAND's 37.31%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
14.32%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of SAND's 20.84%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
24.60%
EBIT growth below 50% of SAND's 237.06%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
24.60%
Operating income growth under 50% of SAND's 237.06%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-0.65%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
94.44%
Positive EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
88.89%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SAND 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.
2.02%
Positive OCF growth while SAND is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
12.57%
FCF growth under 50% of SAND's 53.29%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
118459836.13%
10Y CAGR of 118459836.13% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
221.54%
5Y CAGR of 221.54% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
104.46%
3Y CAGR of 104.46% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
6300.31%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 262.46%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
379.59%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 262.46%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
143.26%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 262.46%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
122932.48%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 152.29% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
363.33%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 152.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
176.77%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 152.29%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
215.27%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 34.50%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
86.01%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 34.50%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
10.31%
Our AR growth while SAND is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.63%
Asset growth above 1.5x SAND's 1.32%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
5.84%
Positive BV/share change while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-6.66%
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.
-41.35%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.