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%
Negative revenue growth while PUK stands at 27.93%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-73.24%
Negative gross profit growth while PUK is at 27.93%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-99.92%
Negative EBIT growth while PUK is at 246.79%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-99.92%
Negative operating income growth while PUK is at 27.93%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-101.60%
Negative net income growth while PUK stands at 2157.71%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-102.14%
Negative EPS growth while PUK is at 1749.71%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-102.16%
Negative diluted EPS growth while PUK is at 1749.71%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.98%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.87%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-100.00%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-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 PUK shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
1.96%
Inventory growth of 1.96% while PUK is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
1.76%
Asset growth well under 50% of PUK's 4.12%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-3.50%
We have a declining book value while PUK shows 9.40%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
1.28%
We have some new debt while PUK reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-53.75%
We cut SG&A while PUK invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.