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.
-10.62%
Negative revenue growth while UPM.HE stands at 4.40%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-15.02%
Negative gross profit growth while UPM.HE is at 25.68%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-101.62%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-104.08%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-125.44%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-125.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-125.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
1.75%
Share change of 1.75% while UPM.HE is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
1.74%
Diluted share change of 1.74% 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.
980.43%
OCF growth above 1.5x UPM.HE's 135.54%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
99.84%
FCF growth under 50% of UPM.HE's 268.10%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-15.18%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 3.91%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-17.25%
Negative 5Y CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 7.56%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-16.22%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-36.47%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 23.28%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-50.76%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-59.59%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while UPM.HE stands at 40.39%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-213.66%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-140.00%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-110.32%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
96.74%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x UPM.HE's 48.84%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
15.63%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x UPM.HE's 10.70%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
-0.11%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while UPM.HE is at 2.70%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
2.94%
We show growth while UPM.HE is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.40%
Negative asset growth while UPM.HE invests at 0.46%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-3.91%
We have a declining book value while UPM.HE shows 3.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
400.22%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.