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.
2.13%
Positive revenue growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
1.75%
Positive gross profit growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
0.30%
EBIT growth below 50% of WLDS's 14.74%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
0.30%
Operating income growth under 50% of WLDS's 14.74%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
1.99%
Net income growth under 50% of WLDS's 12.85%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
1.66%
Positive EPS growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
1.26%
Positive diluted EPS growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.28%
Slight or no buybacks while WLDS is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.68%
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.
169.92%
OCF growth above 1.5x WLDS's 2.82%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
175.59%
FCF growth above 1.5x WLDS's 3.54%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
245.01%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of WLDS's 338.04%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
247.41%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of WLDS's 338.04%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
81.74%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of WLDS's 187.85%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
1563.14%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
802.89%
Positive OCF/share growth while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
114.74%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
290.34%
Positive 10Y CAGR while WLDS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
1590.88%
Positive 5Y CAGR while WLDS is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
148.05%
Positive short-term CAGR while WLDS is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
461.99%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x WLDS's 205.64%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
351.51%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x WLDS's 205.64%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
164.33%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of WLDS's 276.48%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
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.
37.68%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. WLDS's 621.28%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
21.79%
Inventory growth well above WLDS's 0.66%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
11.34%
Similar asset growth to WLDS's 11.24%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
6.19%
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.
6.90%
We increase R&D while WLDS cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
2.54%
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.
