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.
-24.10%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-22.94%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-30.89%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-30.89%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-30.31%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-30.14%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-29.82%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.67%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.72%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-2.35%
Dividend reduction while SONO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-43.13%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-44.82%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
216.10%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
89.84%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
10.17%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
166.46%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
146.85%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
2.89%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
267.58%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
148.11%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
8.78%
Positive short-term CAGR while SONO is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-1.85%
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.
-14.94%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONO is at 42.40%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
16.63%
Positive short-term equity growth while SONO is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
121.66%
Dividend/share CAGR of 121.66% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
30.77%
Dividend/share CAGR of 30.77% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
17.04%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 17.04% while SONO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-17.87%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-4.29%
Inventory is declining while SONO stands at 3.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-4.56%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.80%
Positive BV/share change while SONO is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-3.19%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
2.69%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SONO's 1.37%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-4.69%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
