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.
-19.03%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-70.57%
Negative gross profit growth while AMD is at 4.20%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-218.87%
Negative EBIT growth while AMD is at 63.24%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-218.87%
Negative operating income growth while AMD is at 94.44%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-202.45%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-203.33%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-206.90%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.98%
Share count expansion well above AMD's 0.56%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-3.09%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
736.35%
OCF growth above 1.5x AMD's 203.57%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
85.32%
FCF growth 50-75% of AMD's 151.94%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
544.50%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
24.88%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-17.12%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
93.19%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 148.42%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
-35.81%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-90.09%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD stands at 160.28%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-947.31%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AMD is at 60.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-266.67%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-177.98%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AMD is 104.28%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
1713.37%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
91.55%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
16.70%
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.
-25.25%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
11.87%
We show growth while AMD is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-1.89%
Negative asset growth while AMD invests at 0.29%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-4.44%
We have a declining book value while AMD shows 4.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-1.51%
We’re deleveraging while AMD stands at 0.14%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-3.42%
Our R&D shrinks while AMD invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
8.79%
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.