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.
5.66%
Positive revenue growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
8.42%
Gross profit growth under 50% of AMD's 2262.96%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
12.38%
EBIT growth below 50% of AMD's 112.78%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
12.38%
Operating income growth under 50% of AMD's 113.28%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
12.09%
Net income growth under 50% of AMD's 106.27%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
8.62%
EPS growth under 50% of AMD's 106.25%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
14.55%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of AMD's 106.25%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
1.10%
Share count expansion well above AMD's 0.68%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.07%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x AMD's 2.86%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-52.37%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-58.37%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
176.31%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 8.86%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
29.17%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
5.18%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 7.71%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
-0.16%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD stands at 134.76%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
321.47%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 109.53%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
-6.42%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD stands at 150.77%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
219.36%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 109.25% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
52.64%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 104.61%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
215.77%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 110.77%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
394.74%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
94.82%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
27.97%
Below 50% of AMD's 316.81%. 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.
22.36%
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.
-5.00%
Inventory is declining while AMD stands at 42.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.73%
Asset growth above 1.5x AMD's 1.06%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
5.85%
Similar to AMD's 5.46%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
-2.02%
We’re deleveraging while AMD stands at 0.10%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
7.00%
We increase R&D while AMD cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
5.52%
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.