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.
10.44%
EBIT growth below 50% of GNPX's 36.96%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
10.44%
Operating income growth under 50% of GNPX's 36.96%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
10.28%
Net income growth under 50% of GNPX's 37.08%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
12.12%
EPS growth under 50% of GNPX's 38.02%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
10.49%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of GNPX's 38.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
2.21%
Share count expansion well above GNPX's 1.59%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-28.06%
Negative OCF growth while GNPX is at 20.37%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-28.93%
Negative FCF growth while GNPX is at 22.13%. 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.
-4997.65%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
52.56%
Positive OCF/share growth while GNPX is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
56.42%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while GNPX is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-10058.37%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while GNPX is at 11.13%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
92.69%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GNPX's 11.13%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
51.37%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x GNPX's 11.13%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
741.48%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x GNPX's 145.03%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
108.54%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of GNPX's 145.03%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
-89.94%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while GNPX is at 145.03%. 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.
-17.83%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-40.69%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
499.58%
We have some new debt while GNPX reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-14.73%
Our R&D shrinks while GNPX invests at 60.19%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
3.54%
We expand SG&A while GNPX cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.