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.
2.35%
Positive revenue growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
1.39%
Positive gross profit growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
1.85%
Positive EBIT growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
1.85%
Positive operating income growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
0.04%
Positive net income growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
1.56%
EPS growth of 1.56% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
1.56%
Diluted EPS growth of 1.56% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
-1.09%
Share reduction while VUZI is at 9.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.13%
Reduced diluted shares while VUZI is at 9.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
9.52%
Dividend growth of 9.52% while VUZI is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
22.24%
OCF growth under 50% of VUZI's 48.87%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
28.35%
FCF growth 50-75% of VUZI's 42.45%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
462.88%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
59.86%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 14.54%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
58.34%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 6.07%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
401.80%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
44.24%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of VUZI's 73.35%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
126.02%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 71.80%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
412.19%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 64.61% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
40.03%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 21.47%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
55.51%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to VUZI's 53.59%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
148.25%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of VUZI's 177.38%. Bill Ackman would push for either higher ROE or more earnings retention to catch the competitor.
-23.58%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-34.25%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VUZI is at 30.98%. 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.
59.11%
Dividend/share CAGR of 59.11% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
30.88%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 30.88% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
4.56%
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.
19.32%
Inventory growth well above VUZI's 4.91%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-0.95%
Negative asset growth while VUZI invests at 35.22%. 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 29.18%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
2.94%
We have some new debt while VUZI reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
4.23%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. VUZI's 4.34%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-2.44%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
