PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
14.14%
Positive revenue growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
28.42%
Positive gross profit growth while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
30.60%
Positive EBIT growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
30.60%
Positive operating income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
22.41%
Positive net income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
23.53%
Positive EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
23.53%
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.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
34.67%
Positive OCF growth while SAND is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
35.67%
FCF growth under 50% of SAND's 2142.59%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
126.65%
10Y CAGR of 126.65% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
61.68%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
26.90%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
135.70%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 612.44%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
65.00%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 29.06%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
45.99%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 13.52%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
62.55%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
59.02%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
52.81%
Positive short-term CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
125.25%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 83.72%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
-2.02%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
3.78%
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.
-99.93%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-100.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-3.20%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-1.65%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-18.14%
We’re deleveraging while SAND stands at 9.93%. 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.
-5.92%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.