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.
16.39%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of META's 25.60%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
8.61%
Gross profit growth under 50% of META's 27.94%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-1.52%
Negative EBIT growth while META is at 43.54%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1.52%
Negative operating income growth while META is at 43.54%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-144.86%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-144.90%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-145.83%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.14%
Slight or no buybacks while META is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-1.29%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.01%
OCF growth under 50% of META's 25.16%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-5.89%
Negative FCF growth while META is at 23.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
499.60%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of META's 853.81%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
132.08%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of META's 637.34%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
74.61%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of META's 218.90%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
442.96%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of META's 1150.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
108.66%
Below 50% of META's 914.70%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
57.79%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of META's 358.70%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-324.13%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while META is at 1075.27%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-199.29%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while META is 8842.26%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-162.09%
Negative 3Y CAGR while META is 480.54%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
501.80%
Below 50% of META's 1162.05%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
101.77%
Below 50% of META's 469.81%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
42.72%
Below 50% of META's 94.99%. 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.
20.08%
AR growth well above META's 31.83%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-2.09%
Inventory is declining while META stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.09%
Asset growth at 50-75% of META's 7.00%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
-3.06%
We have a declining book value while META shows 4.44%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.13%
Debt growth of 0.13% while META is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
2.40%
We increase R&D while META cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
31.25%
SG&A growth well above META's 20.75%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.