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.
-18.89%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-39.72%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-39.72%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-39.72%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-46.70%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-47.37%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-45.95%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.11%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SAND's 3.18%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.16%
Reduced diluted shares while SAND is at 3.18%. 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.
-24.37%
Negative OCF growth while SAND is at 22.63%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
100.02%
FCF growth similar to SAND's 98.82%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
300.67%
10Y CAGR of 300.67% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
111.87%
5Y CAGR of 111.87% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
69.77%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 4295.52%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
1505.06%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 209.54%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
120.11%
Below 50% of SAND's 1466.92%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
80.71%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 1228.97%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
1009.06%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
92.68%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
29.05%
Positive short-term CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
2727.43%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 1835.90%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
151.50%
Below 50% of SAND's 684.94%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
68.17%
Below 50% of SAND's 152.73%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-44.55%
Firm’s AR is declining while SAND shows 136.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.10%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-0.37%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
4.84%
Debt growth of 4.84% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-4.62%
We cut SG&A while SAND invests at 8.04%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.