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.
-15.64%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-22.15%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-41.01%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-43.79%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-45.82%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-48.24%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-48.22%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.47%
Share reduction while MLM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.26%
Reduced diluted shares while MLM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.05%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MLM cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
79.61%
OCF growth above 1.5x MLM's 14.33%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
82.16%
FCF growth above 1.5x MLM's 42.90%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
-8.62%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MLM stands at 109.80%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-22.98%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MLM stands at 51.50%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-36.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MLM stands at 11.31%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
113.92%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MLM's 319.55%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
2.59%
Below 50% of MLM's 121.70%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
18.08%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MLM's 96.03%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
48.90%
Below 50% of MLM's 408.53%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-9.58%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MLM is 129.43%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-51.67%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MLM is 91.49%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
131.60%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with MLM's 139.21%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
50.72%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MLM's 80.50%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
22.17%
Below 50% of MLM's 47.67%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
140.45%
10Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MLM's 95.52%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if a higher payout growth rate remains sustainable long term.
81.94%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MLM's 41.81%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
53.18%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x MLM's 28.66%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-24.95%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
2.39%
Inventory growth well above MLM's 2.39%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-1.19%
Negative asset growth while MLM invests at 10.33%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.90%
We have a declining book value while MLM shows 3.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-1.28%
We’re deleveraging while MLM stands at 30.90%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-11.49%
We cut SG&A while MLM invests at 1.90%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.