PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
226.29 - 230.79
161.38 - 242.52
38.50M / 42.21M (Avg.)
34.73 | 6.57
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.
7.73%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of MELI's 14.41%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
-22.59%
Negative gross profit growth while MELI is at 11.66%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-3.81%
Negative EBIT growth while MELI is at 0.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
4.16%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of MELI's 8.13%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
6.05%
Net income growth comparable to MELI's 5.87%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
5.56%
EPS growth similar to MELI's 5.95%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
5.66%
Similar diluted EPS growth to MELI's 5.85%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.32%
Slight or no buybacks while MELI is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.12%
Slight or no buyback while MELI 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.
91.10%
OCF growth at 50-75% of MELI's 137.16%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
104.15%
FCF growth similar to MELI's 111.53%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
535.12%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MELI's 3732.35%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
77.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MELI's 657.97%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
32.32%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MELI's 159.74%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
1329.66%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MELI's 3530.99%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
48.34%
Below 50% of MELI's 268.66%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
246.94%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MELI's 167.82%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
17236.10%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MELI's 2240.41% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
225.70%
Below 50% of MELI's 833.30%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
956.76%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MELI's 322.41%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
2390.46%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MELI's 1344.60%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
325.60%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MELI's 193.73%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
142.98%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MELI's 259.21%. 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.
5.90%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MELI's 19.28%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
13.83%
Inventory growth well above MELI's 21.23%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
6.05%
Asset growth well under 50% of MELI's 19.02%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
8.78%
50-75% of MELI's 14.17%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
0.52%
Debt shrinking faster vs. MELI's 17.14%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
18.14%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MELI's 2.90%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
16.06%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MELI's 99.30%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.