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.
32.72%
EBIT growth above 1.5x RVPH's 5.85%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
-21.99%
Negative operating income growth while RVPH is at 7.11%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
32.68%
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.
32.51%
EPS growth above 1.5x RVPH's 7.69%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
32.51%
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.
-19.98%
Negative OCF growth while RVPH is at 38.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-20.05%
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.
-102666.73%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-29000.87%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is at 21.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
0.57%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of RVPH's 53.59%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-765363.95%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-27613.67%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while RVPH is 60.51%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-208.91%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RVPH is 58.01%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
82516.86%
Equity/share CAGR of 82516.86% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
5226.69%
Equity/share CAGR of 5226.69% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
1660.30%
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.
-12.20%
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.
-8.72%
We have a declining book value while RVPH shows 89.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-32.96%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
44.99%
We increase R&D while RVPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-4.08%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.