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.
-184.01%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-178.81%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-184.01%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-184.12%
Negative EPS growth while CRVO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-184.12%
Negative diluted EPS growth while CRVO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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.
-85.28%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-84.23%
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.
-94305.07%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-10645.39%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CRVO is at 71.43%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-26633.07%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while CRVO stands at 94.41%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-5092186.63%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while CRVO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-138877.64%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while CRVO is 77.65%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-184266.59%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CRVO is 94.05%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-96972.06%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-7412.05%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CRVO is at 194.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-5938.31%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CRVO is at 224.92%. 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.
13.78%
Asset growth well under 50% of CRVO's 44.18%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-763.59%
We have a declining book value while CRVO shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-40.14%
We’re deleveraging while CRVO stands at 57.04%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
738.04%
R&D growth of 738.04% while CRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
40.95%
SG&A declining or stable vs. CRVO's 234.13%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.