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.
10.67%
Positive revenue growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
10.59%
Positive gross profit growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
16.72%
Positive EBIT growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
16.72%
Positive operating income growth while VUZI is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-31.29%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-30.71%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-30.71%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.97%
Share reduction while VUZI is at 11.08%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.69%
Reduced diluted shares while VUZI is at 11.08%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-1.38%
Dividend reduction while VUZI stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-7.09%
Negative OCF growth while VUZI is at 23.78%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-10.50%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
252.56%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
75.51%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
23.75%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VUZI is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
216.56%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 42.50%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
59.44%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to VUZI's 61.66%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
44.23%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of VUZI's 58.33%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
172.27%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VUZI's 61.11% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
27.48%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of VUZI's 41.55%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
-22.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while VUZI is 32.89%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-20.13%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while VUZI stands at 146.61%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-25.48%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-1.91%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
110.36%
Dividend/share CAGR of 110.36% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
29.46%
Dividend/share CAGR of 29.46% while VUZI is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
13.56%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while VUZI cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
53.44%
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.
18.18%
We show growth while VUZI is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
10.06%
Positive asset growth while VUZI is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-13.80%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
5.26%
We have some new debt while VUZI reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-3.01%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
3.21%
SG&A growth well above VUZI's 1.99%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.
