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.
6.08%
Revenue growth under 50% of SONO's 32.73%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
6.50%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SONO's 31.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
9.01%
EBIT growth below 50% of SONO's 100.61%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
9.01%
Operating income growth under 50% of SONO's 95.22%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
8.87%
Net income growth under 50% of SONO's 95.18%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
11.11%
EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 94.83%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
11.11%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 94.83%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.57%
Share reduction while SONO is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.64%
Reduced diluted shares while SONO is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.08%
Dividend growth of 0.08% while SONO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
26.57%
OCF growth under 50% of SONO's 162.75%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
30.80%
FCF growth under 50% of SONO's 150.11%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
1650.48%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 17.65%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
365.68%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 25.72%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
86.32%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
10773.69%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 292.53%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
126.34%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
76.35%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SONO's 691.94%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
13577.81%
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.
548.80%
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.
76.38%
Positive short-term CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
2243.86%
Equity/share CAGR of 2243.86% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
443.65%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 38.98%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
161.49%
Positive short-term equity growth while SONO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
48.23%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SONO's 133.00%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
3.95%
We show growth while SONO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
3.57%
Asset growth at 50-75% of SONO's 5.33%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
1.76%
Under 50% of SONO's 3.86%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
0.01%
We have some new debt while SONO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-0.85%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
1.06%
SG&A declining or stable vs. SONO's 2.76%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.
