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.
20.48%
Positive revenue growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
27.46%
Positive gross profit growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
41.97%
Positive EBIT growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
41.97%
Positive operating income growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
115.34%
Positive net income growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
33.82%
Positive EPS growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
37.88%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
58.62%
Slight or no buybacks while MTDR is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
56.84%
Slight or no buyback while MTDR is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-55.10%
Dividend reduction while MTDR stands at 0.08%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
39.67%
Positive OCF growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
21.12%
Positive FCF growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-15.63%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MTDR stands at 690.14%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-15.63%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MTDR stands at 1272.50%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-15.63%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-18.61%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while MTDR stands at 1566.28%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-18.61%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MTDR is at 362.73%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-18.61%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
87.71%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MTDR's 163.75%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
87.71%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MTDR's 139.65%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
87.71%
Positive short-term CAGR while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
17.01%
Below 50% of MTDR's 274.37%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
17.01%
Below 50% of MTDR's 204.54%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
17.01%
Below 50% of MTDR's 101.40%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
4.83%
Dividend/share CAGR of 4.83% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
4.83%
Dividend/share CAGR of 4.83% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
4.83%
Below 50% of MTDR's 529.33%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
9.76%
AR growth well above MTDR's 2.38%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
2.02%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. MTDR's 23.07%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
2.56%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x MTDR's 1.79%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
-34.29%
We have a declining book value while MTDR shows 2.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-4.80%
We’re deleveraging while MTDR stands at 0.54%. 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.
21.67%
We expand SG&A while MTDR cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.