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.
24.36%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of MU's 28.49%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
27.92%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of MU's 36.76%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
58.95%
EBIT growth similar to MU's 60.81%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
58.95%
Operating income growth similar to MU's 60.81%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
58.21%
Net income growth at 75-90% of MU's 70.43%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements to catch or surpass competitor performance.
60.00%
EPS growth similar to MU's 66.67%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
50.00%
Diluted EPS growth at 75-90% of MU's 65.52%. Bill Ackman would expect further improvements in net income or share count reduction.
5.47%
Share count expansion well above MU's 1.89%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
5.47%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 7.20%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
418.18%
OCF growth above 1.5x MU's 198.48%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
196.36%
FCF growth 50-75% of MU's 271.12%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
12.35%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 30.61%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
39.29%
We show growth while MU is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
17.26%
Asset growth above 1.5x MU's 6.15%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
13.08%
75-90% of MU's 15.61%. Bill Ackman advocates improvements in profitability or buybacks to keep pace in net worth growth.
3.45%
We have some new debt while MU reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
14.81%
We increase R&D while MU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
14.81%
SG&A growth well above MU's 22.56%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.