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.
-13.75%
Negative revenue growth while Technology median is 0.42%. Seth Klarman would investigate if the company is losing market share or facing a declining industry.
-13.25%
Negative gross profit growth while Technology median is 1.87%. Seth Klarman would suspect poor product pricing or inefficient production.
-18.79%
Negative EBIT growth while Technology median is 4.80%. Seth Klarman would check if external or internal factors caused the decline.
-18.79%
Negative operating income growth while Technology median is 5.76%. Seth Klarman would check if structural or cyclical issues are at play.
-17.71%
Negative net income growth while Technology median is 4.39%. Seth Klarman would investigate factors dragging net income down.
-16.99%
Negative EPS growth while Technology median is 4.44%. Seth Klarman would explore whether share dilution or profit declines are to blame.
-17.11%
Negative diluted EPS growth while Technology median is 4.99%. Seth Klarman would look for the cause: weakened profitability or heavier share issuance.
-0.57%
Share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see a relative advantage if others are diluting.
-0.45%
Diluted share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see an advantage if others are still diluting.
6.05%
Dividend growth of 6.05% while Technology median is flat. Walter Schloss might appreciate at least a modest improvement.
-7.63%
Negative OCF growth while Technology median is 2.08%. Seth Klarman would ask if accounting or macro issues hamper the firm specifically.
-5.29%
Negative FCF growth while Technology median is 3.19%. Seth Klarman would see if others in the industry are still generating positive expansions in free cash.
279.44%
10Y revenue/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 24.04%. Joel Greenblatt would verify if a unique moat or brand fosters outperformance over a decade.
91.04%
5Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 16.22%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company’s moat drives rapid mid-term expansion.
50.60%
3Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 15.62%. Joel Greenblatt might see a short-term competitive advantage at play.
452.18%
OCF/share CAGR of 452.18% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest edge that can add up if momentum improves.
126.52%
OCF/share CAGR of 126.52% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a slight advantage that can compound if momentum builds.
78.17%
3Y OCF/share growth of 78.17% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest advantage that could compound if momentum holds.
372.12%
Net income/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 7.41% over a decade. Joel Greenblatt might see a standout compounder of earnings.
114.72%
5Y net income/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 7.10%. Joel Greenblatt might see superior mid-term capital allocation or product strength.
94.15%
3Y net income/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 3.17%. Joel Greenblatt might see a recent surge from market share gains or cost synergy.
-19.94%
Negative 10Y equity/share growth while Technology median is 7.34%. Seth Klarman would see a firm-specific weakness if peers still expand equity.
-34.77%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while Technology median is 9.63%. Seth Klarman suspects firm-specific weaknesses if peers grow equity mid-term.
-8.36%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while Technology median is 10.44%. Seth Klarman sees a short-term weakness if peers still expand net worth.
124.36%
Dividend/share CAGR of 124.36% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees a minor improvement that could compound if the firm maintains consistent raises.
31.08%
5Y dividend/share CAGR of 31.08% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees at least some improvement that could compound over time.
15.69%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 15.69% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees a slight advantage if the firm is at least inching up payouts.
9.16%
AR growth of 9.16% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss checks if the difference points to new credit strategy or stronger sales push.
-1.75%
Decreasing inventory while Technology is rising. Seth Klarman might see an efficiency advantage or possibly a sign of weaker sales future.
0.87%
Asset growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 0.07%. Joel Greenblatt confirms strong expansions matched by adequate returns on those assets.
-2.48%
Negative BV/share change while Technology median is 0.34%. Seth Klarman sees a firm-specific weakness if peers accumulate net worth.
-0.31%
Debt is shrinking while Technology median is rising. Seth Klarman might see an advantage if growth remains possible.
-0.20%
R&D dropping while Technology median is rising. Seth Klarman wonders if we risk ceding future innovation or if peers overspend.
-3.68%
SG&A decline while Technology grows. Seth Klarman sees potential cost advantage or a risk if it hurts future growth.
