PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Metsä Board Oyj (METSA.HE)
5.520.06 (-1.08%)
5.46 - 5.56
4.95 - 8.28
1.7K / 2.4K (Avg.)
-276.00 | -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.
-4.32%
Negative revenue growth while UPM.HE stands at 2.79%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-7.80%
Negative gross profit growth while UPM.HE is at 1001.59%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
86.36%
Positive EBIT growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
86.36%
Positive operating income growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
400.00%
Positive net income growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
333.33%
Positive EPS growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
333.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
23.08%
Share count expansion well above UPM.HE's 0.13%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
23.08%
Diluted share count expanding well above UPM.HE's 0.20%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-192.65%
Negative OCF growth while UPM.HE is at 10.34%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-324.78%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-13.56%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-13.56%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-13.56%
Negative 3Y CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 23.16%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-179.07%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-179.07%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while UPM.HE is at 16.71%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-179.07%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
160.54%
Positive 10Y CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
160.54%
Positive 5Y CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
160.54%
Positive short-term CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-3.23%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-3.23%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-3.23%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.70%
We show growth while UPM.HE is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-2.95%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-14.94%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-3.14%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.