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.
-14.72%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-15.68%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-23.03%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-23.03%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-22.26%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-22.08%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-21.05%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.71%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.86%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
6.77%
Dividend growth of 6.77% while SONO is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-18.72%
Negative OCF growth while SONO is at 93.12%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-18.95%
Negative FCF growth while SONO is at 85.03%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
284.33%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 19.47%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
134.89%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 19.47%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
74.39%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 17.94%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
264.54%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 67.48%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
239.39%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 67.48%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
122.53%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
257.49%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 97.06% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
186.75%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 97.06%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
118.95%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SONO's 96.48%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
-15.63%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-43.59%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-31.86%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 83.88%. 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.
45.61%
Dividend/share CAGR of 45.61% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
18.79%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 18.79% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-6.96%
Firm’s AR is declining while SONO shows 12.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-0.49%
Inventory is declining while SONO stands at 26.98%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-4.09%
Negative asset growth while SONO invests at 1.39%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-13.17%
We have a declining book value while SONO shows 4.49%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.24%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.42%
We increase R&D while SONO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-2.92%
We cut SG&A while SONO invests at 2.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.
