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.
-10.60%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-11.98%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-37.94%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-37.94%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-34.92%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-34.25%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-34.25%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.72%
Slight or no buybacks while AMD is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.82%
Diluted share count expanding well above AMD's 0.27%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
67.96%
Positive OCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
77.88%
Positive FCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
66.43%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
1.43%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
74.20%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
650.77%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
66.63%
Positive OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
1918.95%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
38.55%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 74.45%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
-33.64%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AMD is 79.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
169.09%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
371.99%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
93.18%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
52.23%
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.
-9.46%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
6.48%
We show growth while AMD is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
9.12%
Positive asset growth while AMD is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
3.59%
Positive BV/share change while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.32%
We’re deleveraging while AMD stands at 0.10%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
4.04%
We increase R&D while AMD cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-2.23%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.