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.
12.53%
Revenue growth under 50% of SONO's 32.73%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
8.65%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SONO's 31.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
8.59%
EBIT growth below 50% of SONO's 100.61%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.59%
Operating income growth under 50% of SONO's 95.22%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
9.28%
Net income growth under 50% of SONO's 95.18%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
12.50%
EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 94.83%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
9.37%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 94.83%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.31%
Share reduction while SONO is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.32%
Reduced diluted shares while SONO is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-0.02%
Dividend reduction while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
29.21%
OCF growth under 50% of SONO's 162.75%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
20.12%
FCF growth under 50% of SONO's 150.11%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
1522.02%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 17.65%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
352.12%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 25.72%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
63.17%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
2606.56%
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.
351.35%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
39.13%
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.
7128.17%
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.
438.73%
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.
40.00%
Positive short-term CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
1888.57%
Equity/share CAGR of 1888.57% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
273.49%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 38.98%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
59.44%
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.
61.85%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SONO's 133.00%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
32.43%
We show growth while SONO is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
4.19%
Asset growth at 75-90% of SONO's 5.33%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
-6.54%
We have a declining book value while SONO shows 3.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
13.71%
We have some new debt while SONO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
5.18%
We increase R&D while SONO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
10.81%
SG&A growth well above SONO's 2.76%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.
