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.
43.43%
EBIT growth above 1.5x RVPH's 5.85%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
-14.45%
Negative operating income growth while RVPH is at 7.11%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
43.33%
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.
43.35%
EPS growth above 1.5x RVPH's 7.69%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
43.35%
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.
-15.17%
Negative OCF growth while RVPH is at 38.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-15.15%
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.
-167027.54%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-35848.35%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is at 21.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-39776.52%
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.
-711192.96%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-12332.31%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while RVPH is 60.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-13057.95%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RVPH is 58.01%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
90012.37%
Equity/share CAGR of 90012.37% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
5373.91%
Equity/share CAGR of 5373.91% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
7310.97%
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.
164.96%
Asset growth above 1.5x RVPH's 64.40%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
955.36%
BV/share growth above 1.5x RVPH's 89.95%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-33.08%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
0.44%
We increase R&D while RVPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
34.62%
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.