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%
Positive EBIT growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-21.99%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
32.68%
Positive net income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
32.51%
Positive EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
32.51%
Diluted EPS growth of 32.51% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
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 TRAW is at 9.15%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-20.05%
Negative FCF growth while TRAW is at 9.15%. 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 TRAW stands at 57.47%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-29000.87%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW is at 57.47%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
0.57%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of TRAW's 81.44%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-765363.95%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is at 62.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-27613.67%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is 62.09%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-208.91%
Negative 3Y CAGR while TRAW is 72.42%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
82516.86%
Equity/share CAGR of 82516.86% while TRAW 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 TRAW 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 TRAW 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%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-8.72%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-32.96%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
44.99%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. TRAW's 26.48%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-4.08%
We cut SG&A while TRAW invests at 77.90%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.