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.
10.41%
Positive revenue growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
11.96%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 65.66%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-19.51%
Negative EBIT growth while MU is at 51.32%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-19.51%
Negative operating income growth while MU is at 51.32%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-16.72%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 53.80%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-18.75%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 54.17%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-14.34%
Share reduction while MU is at 0.28%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
2.39%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 0.25%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
129.66%
OCF growth under 50% of MU's 808.20%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
392.13%
FCF growth above 1.5x MU's 167.24%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
186.63%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 137.55%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
186.63%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
186.63%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
786.36%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 700.36%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
786.36%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 84.70%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
786.36%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 27.47%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
246.81%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
246.81%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
246.81%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
410.21%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 773.38%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
410.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 87.75%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
410.21%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 47.58%. 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-17.49%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-3.49%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
6.43%
Positive asset growth while MU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
33.31%
Positive BV/share change while MU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.08%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
18.01%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MU's 47.00%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
11.29%
We expand SG&A while MU cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.