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.
-9.10%
Negative revenue growth while Technology median is 2.68%. Seth Klarman would investigate if the company is losing market share or facing a declining industry.
-7.42%
Negative gross profit growth while Technology median is 3.01%. Seth Klarman would suspect poor product pricing or inefficient production.
-12.28%
Negative EBIT growth while Technology median is 1.37%. Seth Klarman would check if external or internal factors caused the decline.
-12.28%
Negative operating income growth while Technology median is 2.10%. Seth Klarman would check if structural or cyclical issues are at play.
-7.98%
Negative net income growth while Technology median is 2.16%. Seth Klarman would investigate factors dragging net income down.
-7.09%
Negative EPS growth while Technology median is 2.74%. Seth Klarman would explore whether share dilution or profit declines are to blame.
-7.14%
Negative diluted EPS growth while Technology median is 2.55%. Seth Klarman would look for the cause: weakened profitability or heavier share issuance.
-0.74%
Share reduction while Technology median is 0.01%. Seth Klarman would see a relative advantage if others are diluting.
-0.87%
Diluted share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see an advantage if others are still diluting.
10.10%
Dividend growth of 10.10% while Technology median is flat. Walter Schloss might appreciate at least a modest improvement.
-12.04%
Negative OCF growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would ask if accounting or macro issues hamper the firm specifically.
-12.49%
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.
344.45%
10Y revenue/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 31.06%. Joel Greenblatt would verify if a unique moat or brand fosters outperformance over a decade.
151.71%
5Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 22.94%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company’s moat drives rapid mid-term expansion.
79.54%
3Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 11.69%. Joel Greenblatt might see a short-term competitive advantage at play.
196.12%
OCF/share CAGR of 196.12% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest edge that can add up if momentum improves.
159.71%
OCF/share CAGR of 159.71% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a slight advantage that can compound if momentum builds.
70.98%
3Y OCF/share growth of 70.98% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest advantage that could compound if momentum holds.
363.96%
Net income/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 44.02% over a decade. Joel Greenblatt might see a standout compounder of earnings.
265.17%
5Y net income/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 32.57%. Joel Greenblatt might see superior mid-term capital allocation or product strength.
121.68%
3Y net income/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 19.00%. Joel Greenblatt might see a recent surge from market share gains or cost synergy.
44.55%
Equity/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 11.13% over 10 years. Joel Greenblatt would see if a high ROE underlies this compounding advantage.
-33.49%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while Technology median is 17.97%. Seth Klarman suspects firm-specific weaknesses if peers grow equity mid-term.
-34.33%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while Technology median is 12.57%. Seth Klarman sees a short-term weakness if peers still expand net worth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
54.75%
5Y dividend/share CAGR of 54.75% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees at least some improvement that could compound over time.
21.10%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 21.10% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees a slight advantage if the firm is at least inching up payouts.
2.64%
Receivables growth far exceeding Technology median. Jim Chanos suspects potential red flags in revenue quality.
-0.79%
Decreasing inventory while Technology is rising. Seth Klarman might see an efficiency advantage or possibly a sign of weaker sales future.
-2.17%
Assets shrink while Technology median grows. Seth Klarman might see a strategic refocus or potential missed expansion if demand is present.
-6.39%
Negative BV/share change while Technology median is 1.68%. Seth Klarman sees a firm-specific weakness if peers accumulate net worth.
0.12%
Debt growth of 0.12% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest difference that matters if interest coverage is tight.
8.65%
R&D growth of 8.65% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss wonders if a slight increase yields a meaningful competitive edge.
1.84%
SG&A growth far above Technology median. Jim Chanos sees potential red flags in cost management or diminishing returns on spending.
