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.
67.92%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of SONO's 119.04%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
70.15%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of SONO's 90.69%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
100.26%
EBIT growth below 50% of SONO's 396.49%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
100.26%
Operating income growth under 50% of SONO's 396.49%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
87.28%
Net income growth under 50% of SONO's 406.59%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
88.46%
EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 412.50%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
86.54%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 368.75%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.71%
Share reduction while SONO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.50%
Reduced diluted shares while SONO is at 15.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
2.84%
Dividend growth of 2.84% while SONO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
80.72%
OCF growth under 50% of SONO's 276.67%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
118.63%
FCF growth under 50% of SONO's 898.51%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
1001.95%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
108.21%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
35.26%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1117.33%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
55.25%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-4.12%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
1421.86%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 43.05% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
97.22%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 43.05%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
27.22%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of SONO's 43.05%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
900.46%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 86.13%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
41.52%
Below 50% of SONO's 86.13%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
29.92%
Below 50% of SONO's 86.13%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
72.17%
Dividend/share CAGR of 72.17% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
36.23%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 36.23% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
42.68%
AR growth well above SONO's 39.90%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-8.94%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
8.39%
Asset growth well under 50% of SONO's 17.35%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
5.34%
Under 50% of SONO's 546588.89%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
5.81%
Debt growth far above SONO's 0.07%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
13.68%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SONO's 0.16%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
10.93%
SG&A declining or stable vs. SONO's 36.90%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.
