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.
-30.37%
Negative gross profit growth while RVPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-24.83%
Negative EBIT growth while RVPH is at 35.45%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-24.83%
Negative operating income growth while RVPH is at 35.45%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-17.79%
Negative net income growth while RVPH stands at 34.18%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-12.12%
Negative EPS growth while RVPH is at 37.93%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-9.09%
Negative diluted EPS growth while RVPH is at 37.93%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
5.06%
Share count expansion well above RVPH's 4.35%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
6.04%
Diluted share count expanding well above RVPH's 4.35%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-120.47%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-120.93%
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.
-252.09%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
90.56%
Positive OCF/share growth while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
77.71%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
99.67%
Positive 10Y CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
85.97%
Positive 5Y CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
69.72%
Positive short-term CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
173.45%
Equity/share CAGR of 173.45% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-62.01%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while RVPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
56.61%
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.
-4.09%
Negative asset growth while RVPH invests at 16.46%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-13.24%
We have a declining book value while RVPH shows 21.48%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-1.77%
We’re deleveraging while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
45.24%
We increase R&D while RVPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-4.95%
We cut SG&A while RVPH invests at 25.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.