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.
-16.22%
Negative revenue growth while Technology median is 0.95%. Seth Klarman would investigate if the company is losing market share or facing a declining industry.
-19.15%
Negative gross profit growth while Technology median is 1.22%. Seth Klarman would suspect poor product pricing or inefficient production.
-27.75%
Negative EBIT growth while Technology median is 2.96%. Seth Klarman would check if external or internal factors caused the decline.
-27.75%
Negative operating income growth while Technology median is 2.43%. Seth Klarman would check if structural or cyclical issues are at play.
-25.87%
Negative net income growth while Technology median is 4.22%. Seth Klarman would investigate factors dragging net income down.
-25.00%
Negative EPS growth while Technology median is 3.82%. Seth Klarman would explore whether share dilution or profit declines are to blame.
-23.40%
Negative diluted EPS growth while Technology median is 3.82%. Seth Klarman would look for the cause: weakened profitability or heavier share issuance.
-1.29%
Share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see a relative advantage if others are diluting.
-1.23%
Diluted share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see an advantage if others are still diluting.
11.26%
Dividend growth of 11.26% while Technology median is flat. Walter Schloss might appreciate at least a modest improvement.
-8.34%
Negative OCF growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would ask if accounting or macro issues hamper the firm specifically.
-14.14%
Negative FCF growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see if others in the industry are still generating positive expansions in free cash.
961.28%
10Y revenue/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 21.68%. Joel Greenblatt would verify if a unique moat or brand fosters outperformance over a decade.
76.57%
5Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 13.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company’s moat drives rapid mid-term expansion.
41.67%
3Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 9.98%. Joel Greenblatt might see a short-term competitive advantage at play.
1056.23%
OCF/share CAGR of 1056.23% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest edge that can add up if momentum improves.
14.02%
OCF/share CAGR of 14.02% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a slight advantage that can compound if momentum builds.
60.49%
3Y OCF/share growth of 60.49% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest advantage that could compound if momentum holds.
1708.45%
Net income/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 45.35% over a decade. Joel Greenblatt might see a standout compounder of earnings.
27.05%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x Technology median. Mohnish Pabrai would check that top-line growth and share count management both contribute.
33.48%
3Y net income/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 16.12%. Joel Greenblatt might see a recent surge from market share gains or cost synergy.
1385.00%
Equity/share CAGR of 1385.00% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest advantage in net worth accumulation that could matter long term.
117.34%
5Y equity/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 11.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a possible ROE advantage or fewer share issuances boosting book value.
21.19%
3Y equity/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 7.74%. Joel Greenblatt sees strong short-term returns on equity fueling net worth growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
33.94%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 33.94% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees a slight advantage if the firm is at least inching up payouts.
-4.21%
AR shrinking while Technology median grows. Seth Klarman sees potential advantage unless it signals declining demand.
-19.73%
Decreasing inventory while Technology is rising. Seth Klarman might see an efficiency advantage or possibly a sign of weaker sales future.
0.11%
Below 50% of Technology median. Jim Chanos suspects stagnation or limited capital availability for expansions.
-1.73%
Negative BV/share change while Technology median is 1.44%. Seth Klarman sees a firm-specific weakness if peers accumulate net worth.
6.34%
Debt growth of 6.34% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest difference that matters if interest coverage is tight.
1.95%
R&D growth of 1.95% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss wonders if a slight increase yields a meaningful competitive edge.
0.53%
SG&A growth of 0.53% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss sees a modest overhead increase needing revenue justification.
