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.
-100.00%
Negative revenue growth while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-83.05%
Negative gross profit growth while RVPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
7.21%
EBIT growth below 50% of RVPH's 20.69%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
7.21%
Operating income growth under 50% of RVPH's 20.69%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
7.01%
Net income growth under 50% of RVPH's 23.56%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
8.82%
EPS growth of 8.82% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
8.82%
Diluted EPS growth of 8.82% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
0.91%
Share change of 0.91% while RVPH is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.91%
Diluted share change of 0.91% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.55%
Positive OCF growth while RVPH is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
1.40%
Positive FCF growth while RVPH is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
91.07%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while RVPH is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
81.18%
Positive OCF/share growth while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
13.88%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
98.43%
Positive 10Y CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
78.58%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x RVPH's 8.07%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-7.39%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
109.82%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x RVPH's 86.27%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
14.99%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while RVPH is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-59.15%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
8.48%
Positive asset growth while RVPH is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
19.47%
BV/share growth of 19.47% while RVPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
-6.20%
We’re deleveraging while RVPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-18.94%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
28.45%
SG&A growth well above RVPH's 41.40%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.