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.
-2.97%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-5.44%
Negative gross profit growth while AMD is at 150.00%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-40.46%
Negative EBIT growth while AMD is at 76.42%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-40.46%
Negative operating income growth while AMD is at 84.40%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-47.91%
Negative net income growth while AMD stands at 69.13%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-47.92%
Negative EPS growth while AMD is at 69.84%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-47.92%
Negative diluted EPS growth while AMD is at 69.84%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.71%
Share count expansion well above AMD's 0.94%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.84%
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.
-102.24%
Negative OCF growth while AMD is at 45.80%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-110.44%
Negative FCF growth while AMD is at 43.18%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
16.48%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-3.71%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
22.63%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-113.86%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD stands at 9.24%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-102.64%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-105.71%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-46.70%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AMD is at 54.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-59.84%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while AMD is 67.55%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
126.44%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
262.34%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
79.80%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
62.83%
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.
22.32%
AR growth well above AMD's 2.38%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
0.71%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AMD's 9.07%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
2.80%
Positive asset growth while AMD is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.69%
Positive BV/share change while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.84%
We’re deleveraging while AMD stands at 0.10%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
6.39%
We increase R&D while AMD cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
5.75%
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.