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.
0.49%
Gross profit growth under 50% of AXSM's 22.31%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
56.85%
EBIT growth above 1.5x AXSM's 23.84%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
54.90%
Operating income growth above 1.5x AXSM's 35.57%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
56.85%
Net income growth above 1.5x AXSM's 19.26%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
56.86%
EPS growth above 1.5x AXSM's 20.49%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
56.86%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x AXSM's 20.49%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-0.00%
Share reduction while AXSM is at 1.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.00%
Reduced diluted shares while AXSM is at 1.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
28.81%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x AXSM's 25.25%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
28.81%
FCF growth 1.25-1.5x AXSM's 25.25%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capex decisions or cost controls create a cash flow advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AXSM stands at 1244.70%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
95.99%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AXSM is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
56.40%
Positive OCF/share growth while AXSM is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-114.69%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AXSM stands at 23.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
96.39%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AXSM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
45.76%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AXSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
32.63%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AXSM's 11.48%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-96.80%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AXSM stands at 360.64%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-86.34%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-81.50%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AXSM is at 280.02%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-8.20%
Negative asset growth while AXSM invests at 7.23%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-26.00%
We have a declining book value while AXSM shows 35.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-9.98%
We’re deleveraging while AXSM stands at 2.81%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-36.64%
Our R&D shrinks while AXSM invests at 10.62%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-70.64%
We cut SG&A while AXSM invests at 7.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.