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.
1.97%
Positive revenue growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
4.02%
Positive gross profit growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
9.76%
Positive EBIT growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
9.76%
Positive operating income growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
4.97%
Net income growth under 50% of AMD's 36.00%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
5.26%
EPS growth of 5.26% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
1.75%
Diluted EPS growth of 1.75% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
1.63%
Share change of 1.63% while AMD is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
2.89%
Diluted share change of 2.89% 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.
-107.79%
Negative OCF growth while AMD is at 21.13%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-148.16%
Negative FCF growth while AMD is at 17.93%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
352.22%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
53.06%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
13.23%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-134.04%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-105.37%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-101.68%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
404.31%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 78.36% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
90.46%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 77.69%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
-0.72%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AMD is 217.93%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
1080.32%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
107.36%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
30.25%
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.
41.26%
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.
17.38%
Inventory growth well above AMD's 2.53%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
6.05%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x AMD's 4.94%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
5.61%
Under 50% of AMD's 53.80%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-1.44%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
0.86%
R&D dropping or stable vs. AMD's 4.26%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.05%
SG&A growth well above AMD's 4.40%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.