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.
-50.49%
Negative EBIT growth while CRVO is at 38.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-15.26%
Negative operating income growth while CRVO is at 38.94%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-50.43%
Negative net income growth while CRVO stands at 38.84%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-43.14%
Negative EPS growth while CRVO is at 40.43%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-43.14%
Negative diluted EPS growth while CRVO is at 40.43%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
5.01%
Share count expansion well above CRVO's 2.68%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
5.01%
Diluted share count expanding well above CRVO's 2.68%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-30.81%
Negative OCF growth while CRVO is at 38.25%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-30.34%
Negative FCF growth while CRVO is at 38.27%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
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.
-52488.47%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-16557.44%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CRVO is at 99.44%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-182.36%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while CRVO stands at 79.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-47013.60%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while CRVO is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-7873.57%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while CRVO is 98.70%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-9.65%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
20722.38%
Equity/share CAGR of 20722.38% while CRVO is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
5960.52%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while CRVO is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
359.30%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x CRVO's 106.39%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
-7.59%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-9.39%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-49.71%
We’re deleveraging while CRVO stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.16%
We increase R&D while CRVO cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
23.98%
We expand SG&A while CRVO cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.