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.
9.82%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x SAND's 7.04%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
27.82%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x SAND's 19.71%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
33.04%
EBIT growth 50-75% of SAND's 45.73%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
33.04%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of SAND's 45.73%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
37.61%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x SAND's 33.01%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
35.71%
EPS growth 1.25-1.5x SAND's 25.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if strategic initiatives like cost cutting or better capital management explain the difference.
35.71%
Diluted EPS growth of 35.71% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
0.90%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SAND's 9.13%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
1.13%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x SAND's 14.79%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-47.91%
Dividend reduction while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
20.34%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x SAND's 15.42%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
-582.88%
Negative FCF growth while SAND is at 131.69%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
179.16%
10Y CAGR of 179.16% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
0.97%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
13.13%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
185.85%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 2040.18%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-22.53%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
9.91%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
84.25%
Below 50% of SAND's 258.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-50.72%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-13.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SAND is 382.90%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
302.23%
Below 50% of SAND's 849.75%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
57.24%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with SAND's 58.80%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
20.67%
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.
46.03%
Dividend/share CAGR of 46.03% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-56.25%
Negative near-term dividend growth while SAND invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-15.57%
Firm’s AR is declining while SAND shows 76.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
13.75%
Asset growth above 1.5x SAND's 2.87%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
1.65%
Under 50% of SAND's 6.74%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
90.51%
We have some new debt while SAND reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-8.58%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.