PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
238.00 - 242.07
140.53 - 242.25
26.77M / 38.44M (Avg.)
25.64 | 9.39
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.
32.45%
Revenue growth above 1.5x META's 12.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
31.15%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x META's 12.33%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
2.41%
EBIT growth below 50% of META's 10.27%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
2.41%
Operating income growth under 50% of META's 16.44%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-42.22%
Negative net income growth while META stands at 10.17%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-45.83%
Negative EPS growth while META is at 10.47%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-45.83%
Negative diluted EPS growth while META is at 11.04%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
5.30%
Slight or no buybacks while META is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
5.30%
Slight or no buyback while META 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.
426.06%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of META's 1223.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
426.06%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 190.49%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
426.06%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 77.04%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
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.
188.38%
Below 50% of META's 2770.56%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
188.38%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of META's 304.58%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
188.38%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to META's 194.47%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
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.
146.15%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. META's 6.52%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
65.38%
SG&A growth well above META's 12.01%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.