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.
-19.05%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-16.60%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-21.37%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-21.37%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-19.46%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-19.05%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-19.15%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.66%
Share reduction while SONO is at 0.58%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.68%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-2.48%
Dividend reduction while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-16.01%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-15.14%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
262.47%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
97.49%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 16.71%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
79.66%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 47.98%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
280.64%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
140.33%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
137.03%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
321.74%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
122.54%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 32.62%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
137.27%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONO's 50.09%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-23.55%
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.
-37.63%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 1115.64%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-12.44%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 74.16%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
144.19%
Dividend/share CAGR of 144.19% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
45.67%
Dividend/share CAGR of 45.67% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
19.47%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 19.47% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-33.74%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
9.71%
Inventory growth well above SONO's 6.61%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-4.21%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
10.31%
Positive BV/share change while SONO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-1.35%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-3.27%
Our R&D shrinks while SONO invests at 5.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-6.14%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
