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.
2.37%
Revenue growth under 50% of VUZI's 9.77%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-0.23%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-1.41%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1.41%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-5.49%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-4.58%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-4.62%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.86%
Share reduction while VUZI is at 2.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.87%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-2.54%
Dividend reduction while VUZI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-4.24%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-10.65%
Negative FCF growth while VUZI is at 3.59%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
364.86%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
131.67%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 65.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
54.39%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
205.35%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
63.10%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x VUZI's 42.49%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
20.53%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of VUZI's 29.70%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
389.18%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 40.86% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
196.86%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 16.60%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
69.49%
Positive short-term CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
29.82%
Below 50% of VUZI's 217.96%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-35.95%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while VUZI is at 151.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-31.41%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VUZI is at 89.40%. 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.
53.29%
Dividend/share CAGR of 53.29% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
20.12%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 20.12% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
51.90%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. VUZI's 111.79%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
27.08%
Inventory growth well above VUZI's 22.99%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
6.42%
Positive asset growth while VUZI is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-1.00%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
2.40%
We have some new debt while VUZI reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.96%
R&D dropping or stable vs. VUZI's 10.83%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.77%
SG&A declining or stable vs. VUZI's 174.10%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.
