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.
-5.48%
Negative revenue growth while SONY stands at 51.76%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-6.13%
Negative gross profit growth while SONY is at 5.23%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-9.13%
Negative EBIT growth while SONY is at 5.26%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-9.13%
Negative operating income growth while SONY is at 3.13%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-9.26%
Negative net income growth while SONY stands at 10.41%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-8.50%
Negative EPS growth while SONY is at 11.36%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-8.50%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SONY is at 10.91%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.56%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.75%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
5.57%
Dividend growth under 50% of SONY's 12528.17%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
27.18%
OCF growth at 75-90% of SONY's 35.71%. Bill Ackman would demand better working capital management or cost discipline.
29.06%
FCF growth under 50% of SONY's 59.80%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
259.74%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SONY's 66.78%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
90.24%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to SONY's 82.46%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
14.34%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SONY's 49.75%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
341.77%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SONY's 250.82%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
195.96%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SONY's 142.47%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
48.50%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SONY's 111.01%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
334.57%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SONY's 303.27%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
154.83%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SONY's 65.95%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
7.07%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of SONY's 11.15%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
-13.41%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SONY stands at 220.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-17.47%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SONY is at 97.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
12.65%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of SONY's 14.08%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
113.28%
Below 50% of SONY's 126728.16%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
28.08%
Below 50% of SONY's 148.71%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
12.24%
Below 50% of SONY's 66.94%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
4.91%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SONY's 14.22%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-1.08%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.72%
Negative asset growth while SONY invests at 4.99%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-9.59%
We have a declining book value while SONY shows 7.27%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-3.14%
We’re deleveraging while SONY stands at 7.60%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
1.30%
R&D growth of 1.30% while SONY is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
-2.29%
We cut SG&A while SONY invests at 7.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.
