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.
1.52%
Revenue growth under 50% of META's 12.29%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
1.35%
Gross profit growth under 50% of META's 12.33%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
0.28%
EBIT growth below 50% of META's 10.27%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
0.28%
Operating income growth under 50% of META's 16.44%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-0.97%
Negative net income growth while META stands at 10.17%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-6.25%
Negative EPS growth while META is at 10.47%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.21%
Slight or no buybacks while META is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.14%
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.
-5.40%
Negative OCF growth while META is at 6.39%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-6.58%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
11088.84%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 1223.16%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
351.35%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 190.49%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
79.92%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to META's 77.04%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
308.41%
Below 50% of META's 653.02%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
106.16%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of META's 125.05%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
16850.47%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 2770.56% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
343.27%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x META's 304.58%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
89.81%
Below 50% of META's 194.47%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
835.15%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 101.78%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
102.70%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 66.56%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
-3.66%
Firm’s AR is declining while META shows 14.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-38.08%
Inventory is declining while META stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
5.86%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x META's 5.19%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
6.11%
Similar to META's 5.80%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
11.11%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. META's 6.52%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-2.98%
We cut SG&A while META invests at 12.01%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.