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 / 1.80M (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.
11.63%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of SAND's 18.29%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
9.27%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x SAND's 7.92%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
9.27%
Positive EBIT growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
9.27%
Positive operating income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-92.92%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-94.44%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-94.44%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.20%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SAND's 4.30%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.19%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x SAND's 1.38%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-60.06%
Dividend reduction while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
17.39%
OCF growth above 1.5x SAND's 6.17%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
8.48%
Positive FCF growth while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
107.92%
5Y CAGR of 107.92% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
-11.70%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
154.13%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 2544.42%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
132.02%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 224.81%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
-29.04%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
118.90%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 161.02%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
-88.28%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SAND is 1495.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-96.72%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-65.69%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SAND stands at 888.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
91.18%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 156.27%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
40.25%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 65.30%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
66.67%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 66.67% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-64.69%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-100.00%
Inventory is declining while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.13%
Positive asset growth while SAND is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.66%
Positive BV/share change while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.03%
Debt shrinking faster vs. SAND's 0.09%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-21.63%
We cut SG&A while SAND invests at 37.56%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.