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.
-90.38%
Negative revenue growth while PUK stands at 27.93%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
28.82%
Gross profit growth similar to PUK's 27.93%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
38.02%
EBIT growth below 50% of PUK's 246.79%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
38.02%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x PUK's 27.93%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
166.26%
Net income growth under 50% of PUK's 2157.71%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
156.25%
EPS growth under 50% of PUK's 1749.71%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
146.67%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PUK's 1749.71%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
1.70%
Slight or no buybacks while PUK is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
12.70%
Slight or no buyback while PUK is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
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.
-80.09%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-80.65%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-87.38%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
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.
192.86%
Below 50% of PUK's 835.13%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
57.69%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PUK's 48.42%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
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.