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.
2.37%
Positive revenue growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.23%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-1.41%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1.41%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-5.49%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-4.58%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-4.62%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.86%
Share reduction while SONO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.87%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-2.54%
Dividend reduction while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-4.24%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-10.65%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
364.86%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 23.02%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
131.67%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 23.02%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
54.39%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 3.57%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
205.35%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
63.10%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
20.53%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
389.18%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 57.02% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
196.86%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 57.02%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
69.49%
Positive short-term CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
29.82%
Below 50% of SONO's 1543834.05%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-35.95%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 1543834.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-31.41%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 114.72%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
53.29%
Dividend/share CAGR of 53.29% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
20.12%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 20.12% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
51.90%
AR growth well above SONO's 43.30%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
27.08%
Inventory growth well above SONO's 26.20%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
6.42%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x SONO's 5.05%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
-1.00%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
2.40%
We have some new debt while SONO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.96%
R&D dropping or stable vs. SONO's 18.36%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.77%
SG&A growth well above SONO's 6.76%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.
