PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (ATNM)
1.780.01 (-0.56%)
1.75 - 1.81
1.03 - 2.41
122.5K / 296.7K (Avg.)
-1.36 | -1.31
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-22.64%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-22.65%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-23.20%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-16.67%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-22.50%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
5.52%
Share count expansion well above AGEN's 3.44%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.56%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x AGEN's 3.44%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while AGEN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-16.84%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-16.73%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
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.
-6820.22%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
80.75%
Positive OCF/share growth while AGEN is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
65.01%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AGEN is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-4282.29%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
64.75%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AGEN is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
77.40%
Positive short-term CAGR while AGEN is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
285.15%
Positive growth while AGEN is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
-96.49%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-92.46%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-28.33%
Negative asset growth while AGEN invests at 15.91%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-49.30%
We have a declining book value while AGEN shows 15.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-8.76%
We’re deleveraging while AGEN stands at 25.93%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
23.04%
We increase R&D while AGEN cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
21.61%
We expand SG&A while AGEN cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.