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.
-22.24%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-20.46%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-24.61%
Negative EBIT growth while VUZI is at 41.87%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-24.61%
Negative operating income growth while VUZI is at 41.87%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-24.72%
Negative net income growth while VUZI stands at 52.81%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-23.38%
Negative EPS growth while VUZI is at 60.53%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-24.68%
Negative diluted EPS growth while VUZI is at 60.53%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.84%
Share reduction while VUZI is at 17.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.80%
Reduced diluted shares while VUZI is at 17.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-1.24%
Dividend reduction while VUZI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-43.42%
Negative OCF growth while VUZI is at 7.49%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-45.48%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1646.60%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
371.20%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
66.98%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
3375.96%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
797.94%
Positive OCF/share growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
53.98%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of VUZI's 65.01%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
4468.65%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 57.38% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
384.00%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 61.77%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
31.69%
Positive short-term CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
1872.51%
Equity/share CAGR of 1872.51% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
259.49%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with VUZI's 252.11%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
41.97%
Below 50% of VUZI's 227.37%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-34.74%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
4.95%
Inventory growth well above VUZI's 7.24%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-0.27%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
5.49%
Positive BV/share change while VUZI is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
20.51%
We have some new debt while VUZI reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
1.21%
R&D dropping or stable vs. VUZI's 42.31%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-3.89%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
