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.
-16.58%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-14.34%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-20.40%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-19.61%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-20.61%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TRAW is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.76%
Share reduction more than 1.5x TRAW's 20.94%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-26.74%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-26.42%
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.
-91846.40%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW stands at 77.31%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-21838.35%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while TRAW is at 77.31%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
2.60%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of TRAW's 88.07%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-1109485.80%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is at 82.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-20425.82%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is 82.38%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
78.21%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to TRAW's 85.78%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
41985.76%
Equity/share CAGR of 41985.76% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
3459.24%
Equity/share CAGR of 3459.24% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
143.15%
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.
-19.02%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-29.04%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.43%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. TRAW's 4.09%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
12.93%
SG&A growth well above TRAW's 8.57%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.