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.
-108.36%
Negative EBIT growth while RVPH is at 5.85%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-9873.13%
Negative operating income growth while RVPH is at 7.11%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-16129.65%
Negative net income growth while RVPH stands at 5.90%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-12933.18%
Negative EPS growth while RVPH is at 7.69%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-12933.18%
Negative diluted EPS growth while RVPH is at 7.69%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
24.22%
Share count expansion well above RVPH's 2.47%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
24.22%
Diluted share count expanding well above RVPH's 2.47%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-18.12%
Negative OCF growth while RVPH is at 38.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
0.96%
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.
-63.71%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-63.71%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is at 21.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-2899.60%
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.
-30244.22%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-30244.22%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while RVPH is 60.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-27789.91%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RVPH is 58.01%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-195.85%
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.
-195.85%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while RVPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
20.77%
Positive short-term equity growth while RVPH is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
-5.33%
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.
14.08%
Under 50% of RVPH's 89.95%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
11.04%
We have some new debt while RVPH reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
35.15%
We increase R&D while RVPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3110.63%
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.