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.
7.87%
Positive revenue growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
18.63%
Positive gross profit growth while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-2.88%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-2.88%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-15.44%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-13.95%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-13.95%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.07%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SAND's 23.43%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.09%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x SAND's 22.10%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
7.85%
Dividend growth under 50% of SAND's 17.13%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
11.35%
OCF growth above 1.5x SAND's 4.69%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
142.65%
FCF growth above 1.5x SAND's 86.55%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-35.57%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-4.69%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SAND stands at 52.05%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
4.75%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-46.91%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SAND stands at 16.33%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
2.05%
Below 50% of SAND's 62.74%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
29.22%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-26.72%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
218.14%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
112.27%
Positive short-term CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
69.51%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 21.14%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
34.27%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with SAND's 32.61%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
24.94%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 46.18%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
91.37%
Dividend/share CAGR of 91.37% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
78.81%
Dividend/share CAGR of 78.81% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
77.13%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 77.13% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
1.34%
AR growth well above SAND's 0.08%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-6.70%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
2.62%
Similar asset growth to SAND's 2.41%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
2.51%
Positive BV/share change while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-8.41%
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.
104.71%
SG&A growth well above SAND's 6.42%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.