PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
10.50 - 11.12
3.81 - 12.83
1.80M / 1.61M (Avg.)
158.14 | 0.07
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
20.37%
Gross profit growth of 20.37% while DC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal improvements could expand further.
45.76%
Positive EBIT growth while DC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
45.45%
Positive operating income growth while DC is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
46.59%
Positive net income growth while DC is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
45.11%
Positive EPS growth while DC is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
45.11%
Positive diluted EPS growth while DC 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
56.20%
Positive OCF growth while DC is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
56.14%
Positive FCF growth while DC is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
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.
2.36%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while DC is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-199.08%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-304.59%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while DC stands at 52.61%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-1.97%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-260.28%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-191.43%
Negative 3Y CAGR while DC is 29.50%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
31.59%
Below 50% of DC's 3427.35%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
828.10%
Below 50% of DC's 3427.35%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
2217.64%
Positive short-term equity growth while DC 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.54%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-2.65%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
2.50%
We have some new debt while DC reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.99%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.