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.
-7.25%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-7.30%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-11.53%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-11.53%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-13.12%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-11.29%
Negative EPS growth while VUZI is at 5.56%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-9.84%
Negative diluted EPS growth while VUZI is at 5.56%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-2.21%
Share reduction while VUZI is at 19.44%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.11%
Reduced diluted shares while VUZI is at 19.44%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
7.79%
Dividend growth of 7.79% while VUZI is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
4.31%
Positive OCF growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
9.60%
FCF growth above 1.5x VUZI's 2.26%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
783.41%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
89.10%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
51.28%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 3.88%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
601.61%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
49.26%
Positive OCF/share growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
30.31%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 8.91%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
1018.60%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 43.03% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
70.53%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 46.88%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
53.43%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x VUZI's 43.21%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
409.98%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 172.63%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
4.92%
Below 50% of VUZI's 207.85%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-9.23%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VUZI is at 70.55%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
66.51%
Dividend/share CAGR of 66.51% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
35.60%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 35.60% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
0.75%
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.
-31.31%
Inventory is declining while VUZI stands at 4.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-5.78%
Negative asset growth while VUZI invests at 58.01%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-6.82%
We have a declining book value while VUZI shows 42.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-3.74%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
7.83%
R&D dropping or stable vs. VUZI's 17.60%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-0.72%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
