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.
15.45%
Revenue growth above 1.5x META's 6.59%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
4.80%
Gross profit growth under 50% of META's 15.06%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-15.35%
Negative EBIT growth while META is at 150.74%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-15.35%
Negative operating income growth while META is at 150.74%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-21.87%
Negative net income growth while META stands at 62.42%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-19.05%
Negative EPS growth while META is at 70.81%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-23.81%
Negative diluted EPS growth while META is at 70.81%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.46%
Share reduction more than 1.5x META's 28.79%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.76%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x META's 28.79%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-5.83%
Negative OCF growth while META is at 3.31%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-9.95%
Negative FCF growth while META is at 146.20%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
7551.48%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 34.25%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
216.41%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 34.25%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
129.03%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 34.25%. 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.
132.85%
Positive OCF/share growth while META is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
41.82%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while META is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
5055.90%
Positive 10Y CAGR while META is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
93.09%
Positive 5Y CAGR while META is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
28.19%
Positive short-term CAGR while META is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
207.04%
Equity/share CAGR of 207.04% while META is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
94.79%
Equity/share CAGR of 94.79% while META is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
6.38%
AR growth well above META's 4.98%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-2.52%
Inventory is declining while META stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.28%
Asset growth at 50-75% of META's 7.44%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
4.62%
Positive BV/share change while META is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.02%
Debt shrinking faster vs. META's 27.76%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
26.75%
We increase R&D while META cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
16.12%
We expand SG&A while META cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.