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.
33.61%
Positive revenue growth while SONY is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
35.69%
Gross profit growth similar to SONY's 32.48%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
49.70%
EBIT growth 50-75% of SONY's 86.56%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
49.70%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of SONY's 86.56%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
47.74%
Net income growth at 50-75% of SONY's 69.75%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
48.98%
EPS growth at 50-75% of SONY's 69.76%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
49.32%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of SONY's 69.68%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
-0.57%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.61%
Reduced diluted shares while SONY is at 0.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
2.37%
Dividend growth under 50% of SONY's 26362.85%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
84.72%
Positive OCF growth while SONY is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
92.97%
Positive FCF growth while SONY is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
235.86%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONY's 41.73%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
73.23%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SONY's 55.79%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
17.16%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SONY's 48.86%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
184.68%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SONY's 92.12%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
82.57%
Positive OCF/share growth while SONY is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
12.38%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SONY is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
319.72%
Below 50% of SONY's 813.15%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
107.48%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SONY is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
28.79%
Positive short-term CAGR while SONY is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-7.57%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SONY stands at 154.22%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-23.23%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONY is at 123.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
22.18%
Below 50% of SONY's 59.92%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
123.46%
10Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of SONY's 216.25%. Martin Whitman suspects the firm lags in returning cash to shareholders over the decade.
30.94%
Below 50% of SONY's 164.42%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
15.60%
Below 50% of SONY's 60.88%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-17.85%
Firm’s AR is declining while SONY shows 6.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
2.84%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. SONY's 24.62%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
0.26%
Asset growth well under 50% of SONY's 2.56%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
19.92%
Positive BV/share change while SONY is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-12.82%
We’re deleveraging while SONY stands at 7.27%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.32%
We increase R&D while SONY cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
10.32%
We expand SG&A while SONY cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.
