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.
90.50%
EBIT growth above 1.5x RVPH's 5.85%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
74.50%
Operating income growth above 1.5x RVPH's 7.11%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
91.74%
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.
91.71%
EPS growth above 1.5x RVPH's 7.69%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
91.71%
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.
55.51%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x RVPH's 38.83%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
55.51%
FCF growth 1.25-1.5x RVPH's 38.83%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capex decisions or cost controls create a cash flow advantage.
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.
-103253.49%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-39279.54%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is at 21.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-22130.85%
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.
-247692.89%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-3218.28%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while RVPH is 60.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-4231.04%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RVPH is 58.01%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
4781.98%
Equity/share CAGR of 4781.98% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
636.42%
Equity/share CAGR of 636.42% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
374.63%
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.
-42.01%
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.
-51.92%
We have a declining book value while RVPH shows 89.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-46.67%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-6.56%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-79.23%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.