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.
-14.64%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-14.64%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-15.16%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
2.78%
EPS growth under 50% of RVPH's 29.17%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
2.78%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of RVPH's 29.17%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
19.07%
Share reduction more than 1.5x RVPH's 232.66%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
19.07%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x RVPH's 232.66%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-16.01%
Dividend reduction while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-25.31%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-30.01%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
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.
-2395.20%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
87.33%
Positive OCF/share growth while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
68.32%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-1414.90%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
92.17%
Positive 5Y CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
80.18%
Positive short-term CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
1411.37%
Equity/share CAGR of 1411.37% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-77.60%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while RVPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-28.05%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while RVPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
31.41%
Positive asset growth while RVPH is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
13.37%
Positive BV/share change while RVPH is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-15.85%
We’re deleveraging while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
22.47%
R&D dropping or stable vs. RVPH's 30805.76%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-1.59%
We cut SG&A while RVPH invests at 3.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.