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.
9.16%
Revenue growth above 1.5x INTC's 0.11%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
9.87%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of INTC's 16.97%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
9.29%
EBIT growth below 50% of INTC's 75.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
9.29%
Operating income growth under 50% of INTC's 75.00%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
3.79%
Net income growth under 50% of INTC's 324.45%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
4.21%
EPS growth under 50% of INTC's 327.27%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
3.19%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of INTC's 327.27%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.24%
Share count expansion well above INTC's 0.44%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.24%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x INTC's 0.61%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-0.24%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-43.36%
Negative OCF growth while INTC is at 855.50%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-48.06%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
547.35%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 38.28%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
205.23%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 8.12%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
117.67%
Positive 3Y CAGR while INTC is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
503.88%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 82.21%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
185.61%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 40.48%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
204.05%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while INTC is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1243.02%
Positive 10Y CAGR while INTC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
291.49%
Positive 5Y CAGR while INTC is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
95.27%
Positive short-term CAGR while INTC is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
481.97%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 145.96%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
284.93%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 60.30%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
144.83%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x INTC's 43.46%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
41.17%
5Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x INTC's 33.80%. Bruce Berkowitz verifies that high dividend hikes remain sustainable, not a sign of over-distribution.
7.12%
Below 50% of INTC's 15.55%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
10.26%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. INTC's 23.19%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
5.63%
Inventory growth well above INTC's 5.40%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
5.13%
Asset growth above 1.5x INTC's 2.60%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
12.27%
Positive BV/share change while INTC is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-7.68%
We’re deleveraging while INTC stands at 11.55%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
12.69%
We increase R&D while INTC cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
5.89%
We expand SG&A while INTC cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.