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.
47.21%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x TRAW's 38.17%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
40.44%
Operating income growth similar to TRAW's 38.17%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
42.50%
Positive net income growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
40.54%
Positive EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
40.54%
Positive diluted EPS growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.40%
Share change of 0.40% while TRAW is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.40%
Diluted share change of 0.40% 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.
51.97%
OCF growth at 75-90% of TRAW's 64.80%. Bill Ackman would demand better working capital management or cost discipline.
51.97%
FCF growth 75-90% of TRAW's 64.80%. Bill Ackman might push for improved capital allocation or operational changes to match the competitor.
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.
95.95%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with TRAW's 99.99%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
79.78%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to TRAW's 82.66%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
21.40%
3Y OCF/share CAGR similar to TRAW's 21.80%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from a rising tide or parallel expansions.
95.64%
Similar net income/share CAGR to TRAW's 99.91%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
74.54%
Positive 5Y CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
42.66%
Positive short-term CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
160.55%
Positive growth while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
2.24%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while TRAW is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-69.25%
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.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
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.
-6.35%
Negative asset growth while TRAW invests at 179.34%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-14.61%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-8.07%
We’re deleveraging while TRAW stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-50.78%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-4.70%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.