PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Ovintiv Inc. (OVV)
40.910.33 (-0.80%)
40.40 - 41.05
29.80 - 47.18
2.12M / 3.66M (Avg.)
18.02 | 2.27
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.
-51.66%
Negative revenue growth while AR stands at 0.78%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-93.69%
Negative gross profit growth while AR is at 0.72%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-226.72%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-226.72%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-58.58%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-57.78%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-58.74%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.51%
Share reduction more than 1.5x AR's 1.51%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-15.81%
Dividend reduction while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-47.13%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
34.65%
Positive FCF growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-90.63%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AR stands at 608.61%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-84.06%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AR stands at 608.61%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-84.05%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AR stands at 66.25%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-96.50%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 264.67%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-92.50%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while AR is at 264.67%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-86.97%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 168.41%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-127.28%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-397.03%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-171.59%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-73.41%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-74.88%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-19.61%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AR is at 228.11%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
-86.86%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-93.49%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-91.14%
Negative near-term dividend growth while AR invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
3.27%
Our AR growth while AR is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.82%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-11.31%
We have a declining book value while AR shows 0.90%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
3.77%
We have some new debt while AR 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.
-12.36%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.