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.
-95.21%
Negative revenue growth while GNPX stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-116.81%
Negative gross profit growth while GNPX is at 2.78%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-52.01%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-52.01%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-52.47%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-43.48%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-43.48%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
7.17%
Share count expansion well above GNPX's 0.08%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
7.17%
Diluted share count expanding well above GNPX's 0.03%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
582.93%
Positive OCF growth while GNPX is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
577.68%
Positive FCF growth while GNPX is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
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.
9508.05%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while GNPX is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
131.96%
Positive OCF/share growth while GNPX is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
210.81%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x GNPX's 6.77%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
88.12%
Similar net income/share CAGR to GNPX's 87.56%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
91.00%
Positive 5Y CAGR while GNPX is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
67.11%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x GNPX's 49.17%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
1963.85%
Equity/share CAGR of 1963.85% while GNPX is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-27.97%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while GNPX is at 873.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
5.99%
Below 50% of GNPX's 98.31%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
63.35%
Positive asset growth while GNPX is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.97%
Positive BV/share change while GNPX is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
1244.16%
Debt growth of 1244.16% while GNPX is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
6.71%
R&D dropping or stable vs. GNPX's 57.29%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
86.34%
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.