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.
11.11%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of AMD's 12.63%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
9.33%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x AMD's 3.02%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
30.72%
Positive EBIT growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
30.72%
Operating income growth above 1.5x AMD's 19.71%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
35.16%
Positive net income growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
37.93%
Positive EPS growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
41.82%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.87%
Share reduction while AMD is at 0.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.17%
Reduced diluted shares while AMD is at 0.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-1.02%
Dividend reduction while AMD stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
123.95%
Positive OCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
138.47%
Positive FCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
116.11%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
36.54%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
27.37%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
45077.62%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
53.55%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to AMD's 56.78%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
-2.23%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD stands at 76.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
507.76%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
61.81%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
7.52%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
244.94%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
74.59%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
17.27%
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.
19.97%
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.
5.33%
We show growth while AMD is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.69%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-0.47%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
0.44%
We have some new debt while AMD reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
0.88%
R&D dropping or stable vs. AMD's 2.55%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
3.90%
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.