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.
-16.99%
Negative revenue growth while SONO stands at 32.73%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-9.56%
Negative gross profit growth while SONO is at 31.79%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-71.19%
Negative EBIT growth while SONO is at 100.61%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-71.19%
Negative operating income growth while SONO is at 95.22%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
27.32%
Net income growth under 50% of SONO's 95.18%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
26.73%
EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 94.83%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
23.91%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 94.83%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.70%
Share count expansion well above SONO's 0.42%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
2.00%
Diluted share count expanding well above SONO's 0.42%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-83.65%
Negative OCF growth while SONO is at 162.75%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-89.85%
Negative FCF growth while SONO is at 150.11%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
12.91%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of SONO's 17.65%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
-44.54%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SONO stands at 25.72%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-5.90%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-84.28%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SONO stands at 292.53%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
668.87%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-56.65%
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.
38.15%
Below 50% of SONO's 82.31%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
141.38%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SONO's 94.61%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
117.87%
Positive short-term CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
112.38%
Equity/share CAGR of 112.38% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
17.45%
Below 50% of SONO's 38.98%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
162.86%
Positive short-term equity growth while SONO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.38%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SONO's 133.00%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-33.33%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-7.63%
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.
-5.18%
We have a declining book value while SONO shows 3.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.22%
We increase R&D while SONO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-10.03%
We cut SG&A while SONO invests at 2.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.
