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.
-1.32%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-5.69%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-29.78%
Negative EBIT growth while VUZI is at 11.13%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-29.78%
Negative operating income growth while VUZI is at 10.47%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-31.26%
Negative net income growth while VUZI stands at 11.25%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-31.09%
Negative EPS growth while VUZI is at 9.09%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-31.09%
Negative diluted EPS growth while VUZI is at 9.09%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.51%
Share reduction while VUZI is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.51%
Reduced diluted shares while VUZI is at 0.33%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-5.08%
Dividend reduction while VUZI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-167.01%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-393.58%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
401.78%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
135.13%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
54.15%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-118.30%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VUZI stands at 12.89%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-11.54%
Negative 3Y CAGR while VUZI is 36.24%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
54.98%
Positive short-term equity growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.77%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 4.77% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
7.26%
Our AR growth while VUZI is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
46.97%
We show growth while VUZI is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.55%
Negative asset growth while VUZI invests at 3.19%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.66%
Under 50% of VUZI's 2.76%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-68.57%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-100.00%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
3.79%
We expand SG&A while VUZI cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.
