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.
-5.73%
Negative EBIT growth while RVPH is at 5.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-5.73%
Negative operating income growth while RVPH is at 7.11%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-4.82%
Negative net income growth while RVPH stands at 5.90%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-5.05%
Negative EPS growth while RVPH is at 7.69%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-5.05%
Negative diluted EPS growth while RVPH is at 7.69%. 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.
-3274.19%
Negative OCF growth while RVPH is at 38.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-3274.19%
Negative FCF growth while RVPH is at 38.83%. 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.
47.86%
OCF/share CAGR of 47.86% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
47.86%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x RVPH's 21.52%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
47.86%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of RVPH's 53.59%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
60.77%
Positive 10Y CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
60.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to RVPH's 60.51%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
60.77%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to RVPH's 58.01%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
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.
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.
-1.11%
Negative asset growth while RVPH invests at 64.40%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-4.64%
We have a declining book value while RVPH shows 89.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
8.65%
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.
6.08%
We expand SG&A while RVPH cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.