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.
-13.64%
Negative revenue growth while MU stands at 24.61%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-21.56%
Negative gross profit growth while MU is at 68.73%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-62.75%
Negative EBIT growth while MU is at 120.55%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-62.75%
Negative operating income growth while MU is at 120.55%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-61.23%
Negative net income growth while MU stands at 100.89%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-60.00%
Negative EPS growth while MU is at 100.85%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-60.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MU is at 100.85%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-5.32%
Share reduction while MU is at 4.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.23%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MU's 4.45%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-67.48%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 128.06%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-87.03%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 84.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
320.91%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 117.01%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
320.91%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 8.17%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
117.89%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
777.42%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 16.96%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
777.42%
Positive OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
203.94%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
131.30%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
131.30%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 101.85%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
-13.73%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
824.39%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 380.09%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
824.39%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 9.73%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
372.52%
Positive short-term equity growth while MU is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
0.81%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 12.64%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
14.30%
We show growth while MU is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
4.36%
Asset growth at 75-90% of MU's 5.50%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
8.80%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MU's 4.99%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-0.05%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
3.38%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MU's 12.22%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-56.97%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.