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.
5.40%
Positive revenue growth while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-35.41%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-61.56%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-61.56%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-168.70%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-168.65%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-168.65%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.13%
Share change of 0.13% while UPM.HE is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.13%
Diluted share change of 0.13% while UPM.HE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-8.86%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-18.92%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
0.64%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of UPM.HE's 4.03%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
9.32%
Positive 5Y CAGR while UPM.HE is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-8.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 6.80%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-109.17%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-128.66%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-106.39%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-152.24%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-125.37%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-111.03%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
103.75%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 46.03%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
39.08%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 12.22%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
11.68%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of UPM.HE's 14.04%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
193.55%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 25.06%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
-11.88%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
-4.37%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
14.48%
AR growth well above UPM.HE's 3.08%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
1.28%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. UPM.HE's 5.45%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-1.36%
Negative asset growth while UPM.HE invests at 0.71%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.26%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
8.90%
Debt growth far above UPM.HE's 8.51%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
9.92%
SG&A growth of 9.92% while UPM.HE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees more spend on admin or marketing, expecting stronger top-line in return.