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.
-5.03%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-4.05%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-0.71%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-0.71%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-14.54%
Negative net income growth while META stands at 11.45%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-13.89%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-14.29%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.02%
Share reduction while META is at 1.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.33%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x META's 0.94%. 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.
19.38%
OCF growth above 1.5x META's 5.52%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
21.21%
Positive FCF growth while META is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
666.76%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x META's 524.61%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
120.99%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of META's 524.61%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
39.42%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of META's 215.74%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
692.06%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with META's 633.53%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
125.84%
Below 50% of META's 633.53%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
102.66%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of META's 254.86%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
505.94%
Similar net income/share CAGR to META's 530.63%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
118.88%
Below 50% of META's 530.63%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
20.88%
Below 50% of META's 582.69%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
929.11%
Equity/share CAGR of 929.11% while META is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
136.63%
Equity/share CAGR of 136.63% while META is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
57.41%
Below 50% of META's 241.08%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-6.39%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-100.00%
Inventory is declining while META stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
1.55%
Asset growth well under 50% of META's 5.40%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.71%
Under 50% of META's 5.53%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-0.23%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-4.07%
Our R&D shrinks while META invests at 2.21%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-8.26%
We cut SG&A while META invests at 4.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.