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.
-6.85%
Negative revenue growth while SAND stands at 27.63%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-8.30%
Negative gross profit growth while SAND is at 38.49%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-1.75%
Negative EBIT growth while SAND is at 44.12%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1.75%
Negative operating income growth while SAND is at 44.12%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
4.90%
Net income growth under 50% of SAND's 61.15%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
6.06%
EPS growth under 50% of SAND's 83.33%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
6.06%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SAND's 83.33%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.09%
Share change of 0.09% while SAND is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
-0.31%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
25.60%
Dividend growth of 25.60% while SAND is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-8.83%
Negative OCF growth while SAND is at 9.52%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-8.64%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
50.22%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 178.52%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
27.97%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 114.42%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
16.22%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 83.74%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
30.94%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 184.18%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
39.76%
Below 50% of SAND's 182.78%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
24.07%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 91.99%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
0.37%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
183.27%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 129.97%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
212.45%
Below 50% of SAND's 1315.88%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
98.34%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 22.12%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
23.42%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 12.87%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
14.87%
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.
139.09%
Dividend/share CAGR of 139.09% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
39.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 39.29% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-3.56%
Firm’s AR is declining while SAND shows 13.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
238799900.00%
Inventory growth of 238799900.00% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
-2.20%
Negative asset growth while SAND invests at 6.76%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
2.85%
Under 50% of SAND's 6.32%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-59.56%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-55.96%
We cut SG&A while SAND invests at 32.18%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.