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.
74.78%
EBIT growth 50-75% of TRAW's 100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
74.78%
Positive operating income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
64.85%
Positive net income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
64.71%
Positive EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
64.71%
Positive diluted EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
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.
-60.52%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-60.52%
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.
51.61%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 77.68%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
51.61%
Positive OCF/share growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
51.61%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
66.06%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 98.31%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
66.06%
Positive 5Y CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
66.06%
Positive short-term CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
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.
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.
-1.06%
Negative asset growth while TRAW invests at 81849.33%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-5.28%
We have a declining book value while TRAW shows 59775.48%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
11.50%
Debt growth of 11.50% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-73.61%
We cut SG&A while TRAW invests at 61301.60%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.