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.
-14.72%
Negative revenue growth while VUZI stands at 13.94%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-15.68%
Negative gross profit growth while VUZI is at 103.86%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-23.03%
Negative EBIT growth while VUZI is at 0.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-23.03%
Negative operating income growth while VUZI is at 0.83%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-22.26%
Negative net income growth while VUZI stands at 4.28%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-22.08%
Negative EPS growth while VUZI is at 6.25%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-21.05%
Negative diluted EPS growth while VUZI is at 6.25%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.71%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.86%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
6.77%
Dividend growth of 6.77% while VUZI is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-18.72%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-18.95%
Negative FCF growth while VUZI is at 20.05%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
284.33%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
134.89%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
74.39%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x VUZI's 54.31%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
264.54%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 67.83%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
239.39%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 48.50%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
122.53%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 43.31%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
257.49%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 55.17% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
186.75%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 41.04%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
118.95%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 8.60%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-15.63%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while VUZI stands at 243.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-43.59%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while VUZI is at 180.31%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-31.86%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VUZI is at 95.12%. 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.
45.61%
Dividend/share CAGR of 45.61% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
18.79%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 18.79% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-6.96%
Firm’s AR is declining while VUZI shows 109.91%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-0.49%
Inventory is declining while VUZI stands at 3.71%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-4.09%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-13.17%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.24%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.42%
R&D dropping or stable vs. VUZI's 14.85%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-2.92%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.
