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.
-4.10%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-6.32%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-22.67%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-22.67%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-31.20%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-33.33%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-37.50%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.13%
Share count expansion well above MU's 0.06%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
6.67%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 0.06%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-42.47%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 47.74%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-131.26%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 118.66%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
926.57%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 12.26%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
143.90%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 3.78%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
79.87%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
2599.56%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
207.67%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 15.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
47.63%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1673.48%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
666.76%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
149.80%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
2155.17%
Positive growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
143.96%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
102.52%
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.
-2.20%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
17.18%
We show growth while MU is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.60%
Positive asset growth while MU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.42%
Positive BV/share change while MU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
11.74%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 6.59%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
1.94%
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.