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.
-15.79%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-16.44%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-17.01%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-17.01%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-17.73%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-21.88%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-21.88%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.02%
Slight or no buybacks while SAND is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.01%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-50.24%
Dividend reduction while SAND stands at 1.62%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-15.45%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-32.66%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
5.30%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
17.64%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 47.88%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-28.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SAND stands at 14.54%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
13.22%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 19.08%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
54.57%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 81.86%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
-25.62%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SAND stands at 13.93%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
18.59%
Below 50% of SAND's 94.99%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
235.00%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-23.01%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
61.85%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 20.13%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
29.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 51.62%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
22.22%
Below 50% of SAND's 50.55%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
46.20%
Dividend/share CAGR of 46.20% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
91.79%
Dividend/share CAGR of 91.79% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
76.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 76.29% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
57.36%
AR growth well above SAND's 58.20%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-50.99%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.02%
Positive asset growth while SAND is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-0.06%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-4.44%
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.
-11.84%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.