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.
-26.14%
Negative EBIT growth while TRAW is at 0.80%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-26.14%
Negative operating income growth while TRAW is at 0.80%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-26.43%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-26.52%
Negative EPS growth while TRAW is at 14.41%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-26.52%
Negative diluted EPS growth while TRAW is at 14.41%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.09%
Share reduction more than 1.5x TRAW's 39.40%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.09%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x TRAW's 39.40%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-57.07%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-57.72%
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.
-13659.85%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
12.78%
Below 50% of TRAW's 99.09%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
32.48%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of TRAW's 97.59%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-18544.23%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while TRAW is at 93.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
7.55%
Below 50% of TRAW's 99.53%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
44.34%
Below 50% of TRAW's 97.58%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
1862.49%
Equity/share CAGR of 1862.49% while TRAW is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
309.42%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-81.93%
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.
-30.47%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-33.19%
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.
26.95%
We increase R&D while TRAW cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
24.63%
We expand SG&A while TRAW cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.