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
Helps investors judge whether earnings growth is driven by sustainable operations or temporary factors. Consistent, organic income expansion can justify a higher intrinsic value for patient, long-term investors.
-12.54%
Revenue decline while NEM shows 3.85% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position erosion.
2.25%
Cost growth 50-75% of NEM's 4.02%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine sustainable cost advantages.
-33.72%
Gross profit decline while NEM shows 3.35% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
-24.21%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-30.81%
Both companies reducing G&A. Martin Whitman would check industry cost trends.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-699.14%
Both companies reducing other expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-29.71%
Both companies reducing operating expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry trends.
-0.45%
Total costs reduction while NEM shows 2.44% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
127.55%
Interest expense growth above 1.5x NEM's 4.08%. Michael Burry would check for over-leverage.
3.58%
D&A growth less than half of NEM's 7.17%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency is sustainable.
-17.16%
Both companies show EBITDA decline. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-5.99%
EBITDA margin decline while NEM shows 5.50% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-35.05%
Operating income decline while NEM shows 12.72% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-25.74%
Operating margin decline while NEM shows 8.54% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-105.92%
Both companies reducing other expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-88.91%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-87.32%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
128.07%
Tax expense growth while NEM reduces burden. John Neff would investigate differences.
-89.31%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-87.77%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-88.89%
Both companies show declining EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-88.89%
Both companies show declining diluted EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
0.10%
Share count change of 0.10% while NEM is stable. Bruce Berkowitz would verify approach.
0.08%
Diluted share change of 0.08% while NEM is stable. Bruce Berkowitz would verify approach.