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.
16.31%
Revenue growth similar to MU's 16.68%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
149.98%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MU's 32.09%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
197.95%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MU's 30.12%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
197.95%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MU's 30.12%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
202.16%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x MU's 157.26%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
204.17%
EPS growth 1.25-1.5x MU's 146.51%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if strategic initiatives like cost cutting or better capital management explain the difference.
200.00%
Diluted EPS growth 1.25-1.5x MU's 135.90%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic moves (e.g., targeted acquisitions, cost cuts) explain the edge.
0.85%
Share reduction more than 1.5x MU's 4.46%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
5.08%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 4.39%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.59%
OCF growth under 50% of MU's 10.57%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
6.18%
FCF growth 50-75% of MU's 9.00%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
496.50%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
58.28%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to MU's 58.89%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
5.57%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 53.75%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
762.18%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 17.46%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
29321.27%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 95.09%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
-53.15%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU stands at 903.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
550.14%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 112.57% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
275.60%
Below 50% of MU's 637.48%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-3.13%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MU is 462.89%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
1477.85%
Positive growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
97.57%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
25.94%
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.
13.03%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 46.27%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-0.56%
Inventory is declining while MU stands at 62.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
5.01%
Asset growth well under 50% of MU's 20.29%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
6.93%
Under 50% of MU's 22.17%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-1.20%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
2.64%
We increase R&D while MU cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
16.24%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MU's 90.00%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.