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.
-16.27%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-18.09%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-37.33%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-37.33%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-7.16%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
19.09%
Positive EPS growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
19.36%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-7.63%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-8.96%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
54.70%
Dividend growth above 1.5x MTDR's 0.08%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
-4.41%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-68.29%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-4.98%
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.
-4.98%
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.
-4.98%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
91.92%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 1566.28%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
91.92%
Below 50% of MTDR's 362.73%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
91.92%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
84.33%
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.
84.33%
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.
84.33%
Positive short-term CAGR while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-5.69%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while MTDR stands at 274.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-5.69%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MTDR is at 204.54%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-5.69%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MTDR is at 101.40%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
-9.76%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MTDR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-9.76%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while MTDR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-9.76%
Negative near-term dividend growth while MTDR invests at 529.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-17.71%
Firm’s AR is declining while MTDR shows 2.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
52.18%
Inventory growth well above MTDR's 23.07%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
9.68%
Asset growth above 1.5x MTDR's 1.79%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
20.82%
BV/share growth above 1.5x MTDR's 2.09%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
14.53%
Debt growth far above MTDR's 0.54%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.40%
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.