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.
-6.85%
Negative revenue growth while AMD stands at 6.51%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-5.06%
Negative gross profit growth while AMD is at 3336.36%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-2.78%
Negative EBIT growth while AMD is at 160.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-2.78%
Negative operating income growth while AMD is at 103.21%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-5.31%
Negative net income growth while AMD stands at 35.29%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-5.26%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-5.68%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.37%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
0.67%
Diluted share count expanding well above AMD's 0.86%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
2.02%
Dividend growth of 2.02% while AMD is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-39.53%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-48.79%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
86.02%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
50.25%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
57.02%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
495.91%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
98.76%
Positive OCF/share growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
102.08%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
110.08%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 96.41%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
60.55%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 95.02%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
189.06%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
153.51%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
34.80%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-0.08%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
53.94%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 53.94% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
3.56%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. AMD's 58.84%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-5.74%
Inventory is declining while AMD stands at 11.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-3.55%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-5.76%
We have a declining book value while AMD shows 7.90%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.07%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
0.58%
R&D dropping or stable vs. AMD's 2.65%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-1.24%
We cut SG&A while AMD invests at 1.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.