PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
176.45 - 178.59
86.62 - 184.48
124.91M / 173.95M (Avg.)
50.81 | 3.50
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.
17.04%
Revenue growth above 1.5x AMD's 4.10%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
11.76%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of AMD's 21.21%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
13.92%
EBIT growth below 50% of AMD's 52.46%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
13.92%
Operating income growth under 50% of AMD's 78.73%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
14.32%
Net income growth under 50% of AMD's 82.88%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
27.78%
EPS growth of 27.78% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
8.33%
Diluted EPS growth of 8.33% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
-14.98%
Share reduction while AMD is at 0.70%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
3.01%
Diluted share change of 3.01% while AMD 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.
2.58%
OCF growth under 50% of AMD's 19.79%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
175.14%
Positive FCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
537.74%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
537.74%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 9.14%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
537.74%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1014.35%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
1014.35%
Positive OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
1014.35%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
926.41%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
926.41%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
926.41%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
779.74%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 12.35%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
779.74%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
779.74%
Positive short-term equity growth while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
2.77%
Our AR growth while AMD is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
18.73%
Inventory growth well above AMD's 1.72%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
6.42%
Positive asset growth while AMD is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
33.76%
Positive BV/share change while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.28%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
17.89%
We increase R&D while AMD cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
10.81%
We expand SG&A while AMD cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.