PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Metsä Board Oyj (METSA.HE)
5.440.14 (-2.51%)
5.44 - 5.64
4.95 - 8.28
2.1K / 2.4K (Avg.)
-272.00 | -0.02
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.
-7.34%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-27.70%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-44.39%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-44.39%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-35.91%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-36.36%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-36.36%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.28%
Share reduction while HUH1V.HE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.43%
Reduced diluted shares while HUH1V.HE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.72%
OCF growth under 50% of HUH1V.HE's 251.39%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-152.97%
Negative FCF growth while HUH1V.HE is at 34500.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
2.28%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of HUH1V.HE's 85.58%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
33.94%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of HUH1V.HE's 47.58%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
14.59%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of HUH1V.HE's 26.16%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
293.42%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x HUH1V.HE's 132.00%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
-33.32%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while HUH1V.HE is at 85.09%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-28.40%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while HUH1V.HE stands at 13.05%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
63.39%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of HUH1V.HE's 109.12%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
80.25%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x HUH1V.HE's 15.47%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
324.81%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x HUH1V.HE's 16.78%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
109.80%
10Y equity/share CAGR in line with HUH1V.HE's 107.30%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from stable profitability and moderate payout ratios over the decade.
79.73%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x HUH1V.HE's 58.46%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
42.21%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x HUH1V.HE's 36.64%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
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.
-20.44%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-1.38%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
2.21%
Positive asset growth while HUH1V.HE is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
6.24%
Positive BV/share change while HUH1V.HE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.52%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
33.58%
SG&A growth well above HUH1V.HE's 4.56%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.