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.
5.73%
Revenue growth under 50% of AR's 34.73%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
14.09%
Gross profit growth under 50% of AR's 151.61%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
104.96%
Positive EBIT growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
104.96%
Positive operating income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
64.88%
Positive net income growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
64.56%
Positive EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
64.56%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.91%
Share reduction while AR is at 1.92%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
49.35%
Dividend growth of 49.35% while AR is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
8.27%
OCF growth above 1.5x AR's 1.34%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
21.80%
Positive FCF growth while AR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-56.46%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AR stands at 1802.59%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
21.99%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 207.79%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
5.31%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AR's 67.15%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-65.22%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while AR stands at 302.35%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
191.43%
Positive OCF/share growth while AR is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-31.84%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-134.36%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-115.16%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-237.14%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-86.88%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AR stands at 139.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-59.33%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-56.57%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-85.59%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
90.00%
Dividend/share CAGR of 90.00% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
96.33%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 96.33% while AR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
0.08%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. AR's 29.71%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.95%
Negative asset growth while AR invests at 4.85%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.60%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-9.01%
We’re deleveraging while AR stands at 8.35%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-6.01%
We cut SG&A while AR invests at 29.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.