PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
40.53%
Revenue growth above 1.5x CVE's 17.04%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
68.72%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x CVE's 10.24%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
6650.00%
Positive EBIT growth while CVE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
6650.00%
Positive operating income growth while CVE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-177.89%
Negative net income growth while CVE stands at 998.55%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-178.67%
Negative EPS growth while CVE is at 989.68%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-178.67%
Negative diluted EPS growth while CVE is at 989.68%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.04%
Share reduction while CVE is at 0.00%. 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.
0.04%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while CVE cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
3.36%
OCF growth under 50% of CVE's 52.03%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-20.69%
Negative FCF growth while CVE is at 110.07%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-83.97%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CVE stands at 65.06%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-42.93%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-59.10%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-86.82%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-61.04%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
7.72%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while CVE is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-116.27%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while CVE is at 488.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-116.68%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while CVE is 423.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-188.12%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CVE is 180.93%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-75.09%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CVE stands at 27.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-3.82%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CVE is at 25.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-47.07%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CVE is at 20.86%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
-92.82%
Both reduced dividends long-term. Martin Whitman might check if sector-level headwinds forced universal cuts.
-92.79%
Both lowered dividends mid-term. Martin Whitman might suspect broad sector constraints or strategic shifts from dividends.
-78.67%
Both firms reduced dividends recently. Martin Whitman suspects broader macro or industry issues forcing cost and payout cuts.
-41.02%
Firm’s AR is declining while CVE shows 0.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.68%
Positive asset growth while CVE is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-3.36%
We have a declining book value while CVE shows 2.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.84%
We have some new debt while CVE 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.
10.18%
We expand SG&A while CVE cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.