Metsä Board Oyj (METSA.HE)

Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.

Negative EBIT growth while UPM.HE is at 25.91%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.

Negative operating income growth while UPM.HE is at 25.91%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.

Negative net income growth while UPM.HE stands at 17.62%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.

Negative EPS growth while UPM.HE is at 19.44%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.

Negative diluted EPS growth while UPM.HE is at 19.44%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.

Share change of 1.92% while UPM.HE is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.

Diluted share change of 1.92% while UPM.HE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.

No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.

Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.

Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.

Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.

Negative 5Y CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 1.19%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.

Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.

Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 85.91%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.

Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while UPM.HE is at 100.21%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.

Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 226.57%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.

Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while UPM.HE is 30.91%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.

3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of UPM.HE's 376.41%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.

No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.

Negative 5Y equity/share growth while UPM.HE is at 7.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.

No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.

No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.

Negative near-term dividend growth while UPM.HE invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.

AR growth well above UPM.HE's 31.69%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.

Inventory growth well above UPM.HE's 4.92%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.

We have a declining book value while UPM.HE shows 0.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.

Debt growth far above UPM.HE's 2.06%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.

Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.