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.
3.07%
Revenue growth under 50% of SONO's 32.73%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
12.73%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SONO's 31.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
715.38%
EBIT growth above 1.5x SONO's 100.61%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
715.38%
Operating income growth above 1.5x SONO's 95.22%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
41.86%
Net income growth under 50% of SONO's 95.18%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
40.91%
EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 94.83%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
36.36%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 94.83%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.78%
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.
1.73%
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.
25.00%
OCF growth under 50% of SONO's 162.75%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-3.28%
Negative FCF growth while SONO is at 150.11%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-33.22%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SONO stands at 17.65%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-51.97%
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.
-19.72%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
83.15%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SONO's 292.53%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-108.16%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-112.22%
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.
179.50%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 82.31% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
235.26%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 94.61%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-53.91%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
60.23%
Equity/share CAGR of 60.23% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
35.52%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with SONO's 38.98%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
98.11%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-6.12%
Firm’s AR is declining while SONO shows 133.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
90.00%
We show growth while SONO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.96%
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.
2.42%
50-75% of SONO's 3.86%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
20.79%
We increase R&D while SONO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-3.77%
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.
