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.
2.01%
Positive revenue growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
6.56%
Positive gross profit growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
54.55%
EBIT growth above 1.5x VUZI's 11.13%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
54.55%
Operating income growth above 1.5x VUZI's 10.47%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
86.67%
Net income growth above 1.5x VUZI's 11.25%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
86.36%
EPS growth above 1.5x VUZI's 9.09%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
86.36%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x VUZI's 9.09%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.10%
Share reduction more than 1.5x VUZI's 0.33%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.10%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x VUZI's 0.33%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
34.15%
Positive OCF growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
400.00%
Positive FCF growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-50.34%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-33.50%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-43.65%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-5.80%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while VUZI stands at 60.75%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-40.59%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while VUZI is at 51.30%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-73.55%
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.
-102.51%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VUZI is at 33.50%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-109.10%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while VUZI is 14.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-102.94%
Negative 3Y CAGR while VUZI is 36.24%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
21.68%
Positive growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
135.88%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-16.36%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-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.
-12.04%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-2.22%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-0.46%
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.
0.41%
Under 50% of VUZI's 2.76%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
1.27%
We have some new debt while VUZI reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
3.42%
We increase R&D while VUZI cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
6.79%
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.
