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.
2.72%
Revenue growth under 50% of META's 14.08%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
2.22%
Gross profit growth under 50% of META's 16.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
8.50%
EBIT growth below 50% of META's 36.44%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.50%
Operating income growth under 50% of META's 36.44%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
11.83%
Net income growth under 50% of META's 40.47%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
-3.85%
Negative EPS growth while META is at 44.44%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-3.85%
Negative diluted EPS growth while META is at 38.89%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.33%
Share count expansion well above META's 0.52%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.29%
Diluted share count expanding well above META's 0.49%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.56%
OCF growth at 50-75% of META's 10.59%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
21.14%
FCF growth above 1.5x META's 11.10%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
914.80%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 291.36%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
142.25%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of META's 291.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
38.63%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of META's 126.33%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
786.32%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of META's 1162.91%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
212.23%
Below 50% of META's 1162.91%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
56.91%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of META's 415.05%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
808.83%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x META's 158.17% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
99.11%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of META's 158.17%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
34.82%
Below 50% of META's 401.93%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
2140.75%
Equity/share CAGR of 2140.75% while META is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
156.52%
Equity/share CAGR of 156.52% while META is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
64.97%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of META's 96.53%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
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.
-2.82%
Firm’s AR is declining while META shows 20.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
55.37%
Inventory growth of 55.37% while META is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
4.05%
Asset growth at 75-90% of META's 5.05%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
2.74%
50-75% of META's 4.65%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-0.04%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
1.31%
R&D dropping or stable vs. META's 10.17%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-4.65%
We cut SG&A while META invests at 4.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.