PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
11.77%
Revenue growth under 50% of VALMT.HE's 33.96%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
7.65%
Gross profit growth under 50% of VALMT.HE's 42.40%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-0.91%
Negative EBIT growth while VALMT.HE is at 90.48%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-0.91%
Negative operating income growth while VALMT.HE is at 90.48%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-3.88%
Negative net income growth while VALMT.HE stands at 124.44%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-3.23%
Negative EPS growth while VALMT.HE is at 83.33%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-3.23%
Negative diluted EPS growth while VALMT.HE is at 83.33%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.24%
Share reduction while VALMT.HE is at 22.89%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.68%
Reduced diluted shares while VALMT.HE is at 22.89%. 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.
-97.08%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-429.73%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
14.89%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of VALMT.HE's 96.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
50.41%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VALMT.HE's 30.82%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
39.55%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VALMT.HE's 13.60%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
107.78%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VALMT.HE is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-92.02%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-91.00%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-29.93%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VALMT.HE is at 5400.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
233.33%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x VALMT.HE's 205.56%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
200.00%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VALMT.HE's 111.54%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
99.92%
Below 50% of VALMT.HE's 204.36%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
75.89%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of VALMT.HE's 120.41%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
39.83%
Below 50% of VALMT.HE's 109.95%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
155.52%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while VALMT.HE is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
56.16%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while VALMT.HE cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-100.00%
Firm’s AR is declining while VALMT.HE shows 21.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
8.25%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. VALMT.HE's 38.81%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-3.18%
Negative asset growth while VALMT.HE invests at 48.24%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
2.95%
Under 50% of VALMT.HE's 53.20%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-1.37%
We’re deleveraging while VALMT.HE stands at 98.88%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
10.20%
SG&A declining or stable vs. VALMT.HE's 44.44%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.