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.
22.25%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x MU's 19.02%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
30.11%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 89.57%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
114.75%
EBIT growth 50-75% of MU's 171.34%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
114.75%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of MU's 171.34%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
114.79%
Net income growth at 50-75% of MU's 187.73%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
116.00%
EPS growth at 50-75% of MU's 187.04%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
112.00%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of MU's 186.79%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
0.32%
Share count expansion well above MU's 0.09%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.64%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 0.09%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-0.32%
Dividend reduction while MU stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-18.38%
Negative OCF growth while MU is at 16.45%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-40.30%
Negative FCF growth while MU is at 3235.90%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
423.15%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 209.19%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
217.61%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 133.90%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
74.94%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
463.12%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with MU's 438.58%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
339.89%
Below 50% of MU's 735.82%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
7.86%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1370.70%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MU's 1961.36%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
376.30%
Below 50% of MU's 837.01%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
55.56%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
394.32%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 338.73%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
201.19%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with MU's 216.69%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
135.54%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 52.51%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
63.82%
Dividend/share CAGR of 63.82% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
15.00%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 15.00% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
22.17%
AR growth well above MU's 26.19%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
6.71%
We show growth while MU is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
6.76%
Asset growth above 1.5x MU's 3.34%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
9.85%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MU's 3.83%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-1.69%
We’re deleveraging while MU stands at 1.11%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
5.02%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MU's 4.52%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-17.86%
We cut SG&A while MU invests at 7.48%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.