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.
8.66%
Positive revenue growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
6.16%
Positive gross profit growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
7.88%
Positive EBIT growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
7.88%
Positive operating income growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
6.58%
Positive net income growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
7.50%
Positive EPS growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
7.50%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.82%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.88%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-2.03%
Dividend reduction while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
5.39%
Positive OCF growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
0.23%
Positive FCF growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
310.80%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 6.55%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
120.30%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 6.55%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
57.74%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
332.84%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
98.01%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
35.79%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
313.01%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
148.50%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
69.66%
Positive short-term CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-29.74%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SONO stands at 1497165.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-51.43%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 1497165.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-37.25%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 65.64%. 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.
45.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 45.51% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
19.27%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 19.27% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
44.25%
Our AR growth while SONO is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-8.96%
Inventory is declining while SONO stands at 35.31%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.89%
Positive asset growth while SONO is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-12.07%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
0.32%
We have some new debt while SONO reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-0.53%
Our R&D shrinks while SONO invests at 7.60%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
7.12%
SG&A growth well above SONO's 9.89%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.
