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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
31.84%
Positive EBIT growth while FURY is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
31.84%
Positive operating income growth while FURY is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
32.55%
Positive net income growth while FURY is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
32.46%
Positive EPS growth while FURY is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
32.46%
Positive diluted EPS growth while FURY 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.
71.10%
OCF growth under 50% of FURY's 177.52%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
71.40%
FCF growth under 50% of FURY's 177.52%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
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.
-81.60%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FURY stands at 147.74%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-81.60%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FURY is at 147.74%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-81.60%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FURY stands at 147.74%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
75.43%
Positive 10Y CAGR while FURY is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
75.43%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FURY is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
75.43%
Positive short-term CAGR while FURY is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-78.19%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while FURY stands at 333.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-78.19%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FURY is at 333.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-78.19%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while FURY is at 333.09%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
-61.71%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-100.00%
Inventory is declining while FURY stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-3.10%
Negative asset growth while FURY invests at 270.77%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-8.83%
We have a declining book value while FURY shows 215.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-32.93%
We cut SG&A while FURY invests at 71.43%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.