PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
503.87 - 512.55
344.79 - 555.45
23.62M / 20.39M (Avg.)
37.30 | 13.67
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.
-5.11%
Revenue decline while PLTR shows 14.88% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position erosion.
-11.19%
Cost reduction while PLTR shows 118.30% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive advantage.
-2.04%
Both companies show declining gross profit. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
3.23%
Margin expansion while PLTR shows decline. John Neff would investigate competitive advantages.
6.17%
R&D growth less than half of PLTR's 261.59%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
13.56%
G&A growth less than half of PLTR's 263.35%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is structural.
-0.45%
Marketing expense reduction while PLTR shows 226.69% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive risk.
84.21%
Other expenses growth while PLTR reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
3.88%
Operating expenses growth less than half of PLTR's 249.51%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
-4.21%
Total costs reduction while PLTR shows 223.94% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-6.12%
Both companies reducing interest expense. Martin Whitman would check industry trends.
-2.65%
Both companies reducing D&A. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-5.86%
Both companies show EBITDA decline. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-0.55%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-6.59%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-1.57%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-168.04%
Both companies reducing other expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-8.82%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-3.91%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-14.16%
Both companies reducing tax expense. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-7.70%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-2.73%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-7.84%
Both companies show declining EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-7.28%
Both companies show declining diluted EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-0.25%
Both companies reducing share counts. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-0.21%
Both companies reducing diluted shares. Martin Whitman would check patterns.