CRH plc (CRH)

Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.

Negative gross profit growth while VMC is at 204.34%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.

Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.

Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.

Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.

Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.

Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.

Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.

Dividend growth at 50-75% of VMC's 8.47%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in returning cash to shareholders.

Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.

Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.

10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of VMC's 156.10%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.

5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of VMC's 55.99%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.

Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while VMC stands at 1198.70%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.

Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while VMC is at 205.33%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.

Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VMC stands at 43.87%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.

Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VMC is at 421.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.

Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while VMC is 114.18%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.

Negative 3Y CAGR while VMC is 41.05%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.

Below 50% of VMC's 93.39%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.

Below 50% of VMC's 45.69%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.

Below 50% of VMC's 24.27%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.

Cut dividends over 10 years while VMC stands at 392.56%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.

Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while VMC stands at 46.53%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.

Negative near-term dividend growth while VMC invests at 24.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.

AR growth well above VMC's 5.56%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.

Inventory growth well above VMC's 5.75%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.

We have a declining book value while VMC shows 0.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.