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.
48.69%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of SONO's 84.81%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
54.21%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of SONO's 90.13%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
74.42%
EBIT growth below 50% of SONO's 1248.60%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
74.42%
Operating income growth under 50% of SONO's 1248.60%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
68.51%
Net income growth under 50% of SONO's 1512.18%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
68.80%
EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 1487.70%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
69.35%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SONO's 1344.64%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.58%
Share reduction while SONO is at 2.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.70%
Reduced diluted shares while SONO is at 13.73%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
3.12%
Dividend growth of 3.12% while SONO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
132.50%
OCF growth under 50% of SONO's 2674.62%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
160.13%
FCF growth under 50% of SONO's 4180.37%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
325.44%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
104.54%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
69.89%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 5.02%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
325.51%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 30.02%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
122.98%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 30.02%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
103.36%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 53.34%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
321.58%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 177.56% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
150.28%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of SONO's 177.56%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
100.45%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 57.08%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
27.03%
Below 50% of SONO's 515.37%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-29.75%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 515.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-29.49%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 90.39%. 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.
54.17%
Dividend/share CAGR of 54.17% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
20.88%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 20.88% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
26.69%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SONO's 76.88%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-10.70%
Inventory is declining while SONO stands at 10.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
8.60%
Asset growth well under 50% of SONO's 20.54%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
14.68%
75-90% of SONO's 17.07%. Bill Ackman advocates improvements in profitability or buybacks to keep pace in net worth growth.
-1.54%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
9.25%
We increase R&D while SONO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
14.83%
SG&A growth well above SONO's 9.56%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.
