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.
18.86%
Revenue growth similar to MU's 17.86%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
21.26%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MU's 91.95%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
70.38%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MU's 23.37%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
70.38%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MU's 23.37%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
44.48%
Net income growth above 1.5x MU's 13.71%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
45.61%
EPS growth above 1.5x MU's 14.50%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
43.86%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MU's 14.50%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.24%
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.
0.52%
Diluted share count expanding well above MU's 0.46%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
0.78%
Dividend growth under 50% of MU's 1.92%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
29.44%
OCF growth under 50% of MU's 462.65%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
53.05%
FCF growth 75-90% of MU's 67.41%. Bill Ackman might push for improved capital allocation or operational changes to match the competitor.
652.53%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 11.18%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
120.08%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
132.18%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1555.59%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
97.70%
Positive OCF/share growth while MU is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
218.43%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
2520.23%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
61.17%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
121.53%
Positive short-term CAGR while MU is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
407.76%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MU's 342.34%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
211.82%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 30.42%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
86.13%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MU's 8.93%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
113.76%
Dividend/share CAGR of 113.76% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
6.77%
Dividend/share CAGR of 6.77% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
0.45%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 0.45% while MU is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.61%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MU's 20.47%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-10.62%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
7.96%
Positive asset growth while MU is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
10.68%
Positive BV/share change while MU is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
1.90%
Debt growth far above MU's 1.24%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-3.94%
Our R&D shrinks while MU invests at 17.52%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1.28%
SG&A declining or stable vs. MU's 20.09%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.