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.
10.17%
Positive revenue growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
14.83%
Positive gross profit growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
20.69%
Positive EBIT growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
20.69%
Positive operating income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
11.27%
Positive net income growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
10.87%
Positive EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
11.11%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.16%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.41%
Positive OCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
40.87%
Positive FCF growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
154.96%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 285.22%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
241.93%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 80.74%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
152.42%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 115.78%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
812.25%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with MU's 814.47%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
737.42%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 194.67%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
432.15%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 292.32%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
545.17%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 418.35%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
1525.76%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 749.20%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
741.04%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of MU's 1360.28%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
158.52%
Below 50% of MU's 321.52%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
62.83%
Below 50% of MU's 239.17%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
53.45%
Below 50% of MU's 151.52%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
100.21%
Dividend/share CAGR of 100.21% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
79.22%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 79.22% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-3.56%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
0.13%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MU's 7.82%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
1.95%
Asset growth at 50-75% of MU's 2.81%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
3.29%
BV/share growth of 3.29% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
6.69%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 7.76%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
5.00%
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.