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.
5.85%
Revenue growth under 50% of PUK's 27.93%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-22.92%
Negative gross profit growth while PUK is at 27.93%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
144.78%
EBIT growth 50-75% of PUK's 246.79%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
144.78%
Operating income growth above 1.5x PUK's 27.93%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
-39.05%
Negative net income growth while PUK stands at 2157.71%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-99.75%
Negative EPS growth while PUK is at 1749.71%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-99.75%
Negative diluted EPS growth while PUK is at 1749.71%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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.
312.61%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while PUK is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
128.85%
Positive 5Y CAGR while PUK is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
82.23%
Positive 3Y CAGR while PUK is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
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.
314.20%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PUK's 202.69% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
280.00%
Below 50% of PUK's 835.13%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
258.19%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PUK's 48.42%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
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%
SG&A growth of 100.00% while PUK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees more spend on admin or marketing, expecting stronger top-line in return.