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.
21.98%
Revenue growth above 1.5x AMD's 12.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
25.31%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x AMD's 13.54%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
30.69%
EBIT growth above 1.5x AMD's 19.47%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
30.69%
Operating income growth above 1.5x AMD's 20.30%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
32.91%
Positive net income growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
31.58%
Positive EPS growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
32.43%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.08%
Share reduction while AMD is at 0.19%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.16%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
2.14%
Dividend growth of 2.14% while AMD is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
56.83%
OCF growth at 50-75% of AMD's 106.85%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
59.41%
FCF growth under 50% of AMD's 119.96%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
1681.26%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 191.68%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
890.21%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 163.62%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
343.59%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 20.30%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
2546.14%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 428.47%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
1164.93%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 115.19%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
458.57%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 19.80%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
7610.59%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 162.49% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
2040.31%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 107.60%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
746.59%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
789.30%
Below 50% of AMD's 14428.00%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
354.45%
Below 50% of AMD's 1391.02%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
155.44%
Below 50% of AMD's 482.13%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
88.89%
Dividend/share CAGR of 88.89% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-0.21%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while AMD stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
0.41%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 0.41% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
20.34%
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.
10.53%
Inventory growth well above AMD's 6.70%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
21.39%
Positive asset growth while AMD is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
29.30%
BV/share growth above 1.5x AMD's 0.84%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
0.26%
We have some new debt while AMD reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
7.45%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. AMD's 4.65%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
3.34%
SG&A declining or stable vs. AMD's 9.85%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.