229.02 - 234.51
169.21 - 260.10
55.82M / 54.92M (Avg.)
32.24 | 7.26
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.
-8.27%
Negative revenue growth while SONO stands at 32.73%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-22.31%
Negative gross profit growth while SONO is at 31.79%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-175.56%
Negative EBIT growth while SONO is at 100.61%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-175.56%
Negative operating income growth while SONO is at 95.22%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-564.00%
Negative net income growth while SONO stands at 95.18%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-561.11%
Negative EPS growth while SONO is at 94.83%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-561.11%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SONO is at 94.83%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.01%
Share reduction while SONO is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.01%
Reduced diluted shares while SONO is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-77.40%
Negative OCF growth while SONO is at 162.75%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-81.77%
Negative FCF growth while SONO is at 150.11%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
228.66%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 17.65%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
12.03%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SONO's 25.72%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-19.01%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-70.50%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-76.65%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SONO stands at 691.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-168.49%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SONO is 94.61%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-372.36%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.01%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 38.98%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-11.17%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-100.00%
Negative near-term dividend growth while SONO invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-0.27%
Firm’s AR is declining while SONO shows 133.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-26.28%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.72%
Negative asset growth while SONO invests at 5.33%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-5.63%
We have a declining book value while SONO shows 3.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.44%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
2.05%
We increase R&D while SONO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.62%
SG&A growth well above SONO's 2.76%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.
