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.
0.21%
Positive revenue growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
15.43%
Positive gross profit growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
96.75%
Positive EBIT growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
96.75%
Positive operating income growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
133.94%
Positive net income growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
150.00%
Positive EPS growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
150.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-6.43%
Share reduction while UPM.HE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-6.43%
Reduced diluted shares while UPM.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.
-9.63%
Negative OCF growth while UPM.HE is at 13.87%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-31.92%
Negative FCF growth while UPM.HE is at 18.37%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-45.85%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-4.11%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
12.57%
Positive 3Y CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
354.26%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 49.11%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
37.09%
Positive OCF/share growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
119.88%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
600.00%
Positive 10Y CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-0.00%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
66.67%
Positive short-term CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
3.68%
Below 50% of UPM.HE's 31.23%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
33.38%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x UPM.HE's 22.36%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
31.55%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 15.61%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
129.06%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 85.85%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
42.58%
3Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x UPM.HE's 36.73%. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the company's short-term profits or payout policy justify these higher hikes.
2.44%
Our AR growth while UPM.HE is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
6.19%
We show growth while UPM.HE is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-1.35%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
3.07%
Positive BV/share change while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
4.18%
We have some new debt while UPM.HE reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
10.87%
SG&A growth of 10.87% while UPM.HE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees more spend on admin or marketing, expecting stronger top-line in return.