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.
8.54%
Positive revenue growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
13.64%
Positive gross profit growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-13.86%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-13.86%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-21.22%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-18.31%
Negative EPS growth while AMD is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-22.54%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AMD is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
1.95%
Share count expansion well above AMD's 0.14%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
1.97%
Diluted share change of 1.97% 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.
-60.38%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-65.89%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
179.08%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
23.81%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-22.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AMD stands at 14.85%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
237.34%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
199.82%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 95.20%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
10.76%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AMD's 123.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
265.36%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
30.85%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 27.78%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
-28.55%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
420.13%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
88.06%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
17.68%
Below 50% of AMD's 650.44%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-1.60%
Firm’s AR is declining while AMD shows 4.68%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
10.26%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AMD's 22.90%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
5.37%
Asset growth above 1.5x AMD's 0.69%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
6.30%
Positive BV/share change while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-1.85%
We’re deleveraging while AMD stands at 0.15%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
7.40%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. AMD's 2.79%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-32.34%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.