PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Samsara Inc. (IOT)
33.600.80 (-2.33%)
33.44 - 34.57
31.40 - 61.90
7.61M / 5.95M (Avg.)
-152.73 | -0.22
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.
10.48%
Revenue growth under 50% of FLNC's 84.92%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
6.10%
Gross profit growth under 50% of FLNC's 306.66%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-679.76%
Negative EBIT growth while FLNC is at 11.40%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-679.76%
Negative operating income growth while FLNC is at 11.10%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-679.04%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-600.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-600.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
12.45%
Share reduction more than 1.5x FLNC's 105.76%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
10.94%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x FLNC's 105.76%. 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.
-17.07%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-28.39%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
38.90%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while FLNC is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
38.90%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FLNC is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
38.90%
Positive 3Y CAGR while FLNC is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-20.85%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-20.85%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-20.85%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-485.96%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-485.96%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-485.96%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
255.68%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with FLNC's 260.95%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
255.68%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with FLNC's 260.95%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
255.68%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to FLNC's 260.95%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
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.
37.98%
AR growth well above FLNC's 38.44%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
48.23%
Inventory growth well above FLNC's 43.87%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
86.77%
Asset growth above 1.5x FLNC's 4.37%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
239.76%
Positive BV/share change while FLNC is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.72%
We’re deleveraging while FLNC stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
325.97%
We increase R&D while FLNC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
155.50%
SG&A growth well above FLNC's 18.93%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.