PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
CRH plc (CRH)
114.271.68 (1.49%)
111.48 - 114.40
76.75 - 114.40
5.09M / 4.23M (Avg.)
23.96 | 4.77
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.
-63.74%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-73.24%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-99.92%
Negative EBIT growth while MLM is at 28.25%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-99.92%
Negative operating income growth while MLM is at 28.25%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-101.60%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-102.14%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-102.16%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.98%
Share reduction while MLM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.87%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while MLM stands at 1.46%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-121.11%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-144.54%
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.
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.
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.
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%
Firm’s AR is declining while MLM shows 1.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
1.96%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MLM's 8.58%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
1.76%
Positive asset growth while MLM is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-3.50%
We have a declining book value while MLM shows 0.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
1.28%
Debt growth far above MLM's 0.03%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-53.75%
We cut SG&A while MLM invests at 3.57%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.