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.
3.29%
EBIT growth 50-75% of RVPH's 5.85%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
3.29%
Operating income growth under 50% of RVPH's 7.11%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
27.01%
Net income growth above 1.5x RVPH's 5.90%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
26.90%
EPS growth above 1.5x RVPH's 7.69%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
26.90%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x RVPH's 7.69%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
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.
3.31%
OCF growth under 50% of RVPH's 38.83%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
3.31%
FCF growth under 50% of RVPH's 38.83%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
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.
-12.36%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-12.36%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is at 21.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-12.36%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH stands at 53.59%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
44.63%
Positive 10Y CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
44.63%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of RVPH's 60.51%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
44.63%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of RVPH's 58.01%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
-80.42%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-80.42%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while RVPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-80.42%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
0.02%
Asset growth well under 50% of RVPH's 64.40%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-16.23%
We have a declining book value while RVPH shows 89.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
14.30%
We have some new debt while RVPH reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-4.62%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.