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.
15.31%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x MU's 11.55%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
17.74%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 51.91%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
80.64%
EBIT growth below 50% of MU's 747.83%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
80.64%
Operating income growth under 50% of MU's 747.83%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
75.63%
Net income growth at 50-75% of MU's 115.03%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
77.08%
EPS growth at 50-75% of MU's 114.29%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
72.92%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of MU's 114.29%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
0.54%
Share count expansion well above MU's 0.79%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.92%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x MU's 3.01%. 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.
-9.66%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 166.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-1.54%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 552.69%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
106.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 87.93%. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate brand strength or geographical expansion fueling growth.
-3.75%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MU stands at 16.78%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
18.09%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
46.98%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MU's 688.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-57.43%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is at 117.02%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
13.76%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
417.74%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 111.89% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
-20.89%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MU is 113.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
72.16%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
297.00%
Positive growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
69.96%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
72.61%
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.
-0.08%
Firm’s AR is declining while MU shows 22.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
10.80%
Inventory growth well above MU's 0.64%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
3.11%
Asset growth above 1.5x MU's 1.03%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
5.47%
BV/share growth of 5.47% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
-3.01%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
1.06%
R&D dropping or stable vs. MU's 5.61%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-16.38%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 3.25%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.