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.
3.07%
Revenue growth under 50% of MU's 8.27%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
8.43%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of MU's 10.24%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
33.29%
EBIT growth similar to MU's 34.77%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
33.29%
Operating income growth similar to MU's 34.77%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
34.23%
Net income growth at 75-90% of MU's 45.24%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements to catch or surpass competitor performance.
39.13%
EPS growth at 75-90% of MU's 50.83%. Bill Ackman would push for improved profitability or share repurchases to catch up.
30.43%
Diluted EPS growth at 75-90% of MU's 35.75%. Bill Ackman would expect further improvements in net income or share count reduction.
-4.97%
Share reduction while MU is at 0.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
1.70%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MU's 8.78%. 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.
-9.67%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 39.68%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-6.30%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
470.73%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
195.45%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-10.51%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MU stands at 85.05%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
1728.60%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
533.44%
Positive OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
64.10%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 297.02%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
609.96%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
164.79%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-30.83%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MU is 118.45%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
1013.55%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 77.70%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
469.21%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
26.58%
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.
-13.85%
Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 1.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-2.46%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.40%
Asset growth above 1.5x MU's 0.04%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
9.90%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MU's 0.84%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
902.10%
We have some new debt while MU reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.21%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MU's 9.97%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-8.64%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 45.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.