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.
100.00%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x TRAW's 7.55%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-1.47%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1.47%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-1.89%
Negative net income growth while TRAW stands at 93.12%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
2.63%
EPS growth under 50% of TRAW's 93.22%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
2.63%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of TRAW's 93.22%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
3.22%
Share change of 3.22% while TRAW is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
3.22%
Diluted share change of 3.22% while TRAW 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.
-50.21%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-50.21%
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.
-100.00%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
91.36%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with TRAW's 99.97%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
62.52%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 95.31%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
-48.56%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
94.18%
Similar net income/share CAGR to TRAW's 99.98%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
69.28%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of TRAW's 97.02%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
-24.85%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-50.75%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-32.62%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while TRAW is at 99.46%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-67.01%
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.
-8.62%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-15.55%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-7.46%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.75%
R&D dropping or stable vs. TRAW's 29.12%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-21.32%
We cut SG&A while TRAW invests at 76.02%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.