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
Helps investors judge whether earnings growth is driven by sustainable operations or temporary factors. Consistent, organic income expansion can justify a higher intrinsic value for patient, long-term investors.
-3.85%
Revenue decline while UPM.HE shows 1.02% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position erosion.
-0.18%
Cost reduction while UPM.HE shows 2.23% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive advantage.
-16.31%
Both companies show declining gross profit. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-12.96%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
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.
-71.69%
Other expenses reduction while UPM.HE shows 0.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
-1.57%
Operating expenses reduction while UPM.HE shows 162.32% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-0.44%
Total costs reduction while UPM.HE shows 6.74% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-33.33%
Interest expense reduction while UPM.HE shows 84.62% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-29.13%
D&A reduction while UPM.HE shows 19.69% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
-22.22%
Both companies show EBITDA decline. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-47.26%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-89.49%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-89.07%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
155.00%
Other expenses growth while UPM.HE reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-84.36%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-83.74%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-70.00%
Both companies reducing tax expense. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-76.26%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-75.31%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-76.43%
Both companies show declining EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-76.43%
Both companies show declining diluted EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
0.28%
Share count change of 0.28% while UPM.HE is stable. Bruce Berkowitz would verify approach.
0.28%
Diluted share change of 0.28% while UPM.HE is stable. Bruce Berkowitz would verify approach.