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.
34.52%
Positive revenue growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
33.80%
Positive gross profit growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
65.60%
Positive EBIT growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
65.60%
Positive operating income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
63.05%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
50.00%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
80.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
23.13%
Share count expansion well above MU's 0.27%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
4.21%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 0.28%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
144.30%
Positive OCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-1960.10%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
228.72%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to MU's 249.69%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
228.72%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
228.72%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
660.31%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 54.04%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
660.31%
Positive OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
660.31%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
322.69%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
322.69%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
322.69%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
419.51%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 679.74%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
419.51%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 60.02%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
419.51%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 40.41%. 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.
25.23%
Our AR growth while MU is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
77.51%
We show growth while MU is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
20.51%
Positive asset growth while MU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.59%
Positive BV/share change while MU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.39%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 0.46%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
0.32%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MU's 1.56%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
36.46%
SG&A growth well above MU's 24.22%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.