Metsä Board Oyj (METSA.HE)

Negative revenue growth while VALMT.HE stands at 4.81%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.

Negative gross profit growth while VALMT.HE is at 2.93%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.

Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.

Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.

Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.

Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.

Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.

Share count expansion well above VALMT.HE's 0.02%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.

Diluted share count expanding well above VALMT.HE's 0.02%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.

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

Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VALMT.HE stands at 29.63%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.

Negative 5Y CAGR while VALMT.HE stands at 11.24%. 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 VALMT.HE stands at 278.13%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.

Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.

Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VALMT.HE stands at 192.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.

Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VALMT.HE is at 8.49%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.

Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.

Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.

Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while VALMT.HE stands at 139.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.

Negative 5Y equity/share growth while VALMT.HE is at 103.25%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.

Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VALMT.HE is at 0.47%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.

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

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

Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.

Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.

Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.