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.
-4.41%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-4.40%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-29.31%
Negative EBIT growth while VUZI is at 11.13%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-29.31%
Negative operating income growth while VUZI is at 10.47%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-20.00%
Negative net income growth while VUZI stands at 11.25%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-20.00%
Negative EPS growth while VUZI is at 9.09%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-20.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while VUZI is at 9.09%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.82%
Share count expansion well above VUZI's 0.33%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.25%
Diluted share count expanding well above VUZI's 0.33%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1950.00%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-65.85%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-43.80%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-41.59%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-25.85%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-110.75%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while VUZI stands at 60.75%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
87.25%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 51.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
-133.99%
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.
-83.37%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VUZI is at 33.50%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
143.69%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 14.04%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-87.26%
Negative 3Y CAGR while VUZI is 36.24%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
31.17%
Positive growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
141.35%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
10.68%
Positive short-term equity growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while VUZI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.80%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
30.77%
We show growth while VUZI is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.46%
Asset growth well under 50% of VUZI's 3.19%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
0.47%
Under 50% of VUZI's 2.76%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
1.61%
We have some new debt while VUZI reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-4.50%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
0.74%
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.
