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.
10.69%
Positive revenue growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
6.57%
Positive gross profit growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-15.90%
Negative EBIT growth while WLDS is at 14.74%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-15.90%
Negative operating income growth while WLDS is at 14.74%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
14.83%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x WLDS's 12.85%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
14.65%
Positive EPS growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
14.58%
Positive diluted EPS growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.30%
Slight or no buybacks while WLDS is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.32%
Slight or no buyback while WLDS is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.77%
OCF growth above 1.5x WLDS's 2.82%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
18.18%
FCF growth above 1.5x WLDS's 3.54%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
21.58%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of WLDS's 338.04%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
174.09%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of WLDS's 338.04%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
139.24%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of WLDS's 187.85%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
51.22%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
215.21%
Positive OCF/share growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
1125.90%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1164.79%
Positive 10Y CAGR while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
574.74%
Positive 5Y CAGR while WLDS is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
944.89%
Positive short-term CAGR while WLDS is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
183.02%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of WLDS's 205.64%. Bill Ackman would push for either higher ROE or more earnings retention to catch the competitor.
109.27%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of WLDS's 205.64%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
100.54%
Below 50% of WLDS's 276.48%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
35.86%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. WLDS's 621.28%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
26.76%
Inventory growth well above WLDS's 0.66%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
13.83%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x WLDS's 11.24%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
6.69%
Under 50% of WLDS's 160.75%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.29%
We increase R&D while WLDS cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
7.02%
We expand SG&A while WLDS cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.
