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.
13.53%
Positive revenue growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
2.69%
Positive gross profit growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-6.51%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-6.51%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
22.30%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
30.00%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
20.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.92%
Share count expansion well above MU's 1.48%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
3.95%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 1.04%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-53.46%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-419.88%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 529.63%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
310.99%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 63.83%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
310.99%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
335.67%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
497.51%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 61.36%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
497.51%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 55.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
26.22%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 628.16%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
151.32%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
151.32%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
73.14%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to MU's 70.41%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
741.63%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 334.55%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
741.63%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 12.61%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
680.22%
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.
22.13%
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.
31.41%
Inventory growth well above MU's 9.27%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
5.49%
Positive asset growth while MU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.70%
Positive BV/share change while MU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.11%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 5.81%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.64%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 0.80%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-2.90%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.