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.
-30.76%
Negative revenue growth while VUZI stands at 71.49%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-30.93%
Negative gross profit growth while VUZI is at 278.36%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-39.51%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-39.51%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-31.11%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-29.59%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-29.90%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-1.72%
Share reduction while VUZI is at 3.92%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.73%
Reduced diluted shares while VUZI is at 3.92%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-2.79%
Dividend reduction while VUZI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-46.52%
Negative OCF growth while VUZI is at 2.91%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-57.09%
Negative FCF growth while VUZI is at 3.18%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
897.19%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
83.53%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
21.52%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of VUZI's 260.86%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
1453.92%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
58.39%
Positive OCF/share growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-8.57%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
1520.64%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 36.40% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
89.51%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 52.13%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
17.45%
Positive short-term CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
761.13%
Equity/share CAGR of 761.13% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
22.58%
Below 50% of VUZI's 157.78%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
13.40%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 6.32%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
67.63%
Dividend/share CAGR of 67.63% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
34.09%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 34.09% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-55.98%
Firm’s AR is declining while VUZI shows 94.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
73.31%
Inventory growth well above VUZI's 23.33%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-9.66%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-7.92%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.46%
We’re deleveraging while VUZI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-0.85%
Our R&D shrinks while VUZI invests at 24.73%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-1.91%
We cut SG&A while VUZI invests at 20.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.
