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.
4.89%
Revenue growth similar to MU's 5.08%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
5.98%
Positive gross profit growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
13.25%
Positive EBIT growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
13.25%
Positive operating income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
17.62%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
15.87%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
15.87%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.95%
Share count expansion well above MU's 0.46%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-0.06%
Reduced diluted shares while MU is at 0.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
197.99%
OCF growth above 1.5x MU's 19.51%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
249.90%
FCF growth above 1.5x MU's 124.18%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
104.85%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 71.81%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
13.16%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 30.89%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
6.40%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 61.77%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
793.32%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 136.70%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
-26.42%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is at 594.73%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
409.15%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 274.24%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
183.95%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
45.78%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
158.63%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 9.10%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
362.88%
Positive growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
87.50%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
43.12%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 36.99%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
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.
-11.59%
Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 7.41%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-11.69%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
3.57%
Asset growth above 1.5x MU's 1.25%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
6.68%
Positive BV/share change while MU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-2.42%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 38.14%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
3.54%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 4.05%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-0.39%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.