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.
-16.74%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-14.35%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
1.92%
Positive EBIT growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
1.92%
Positive operating income growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
790.82%
Positive net income growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
669.68%
Positive EPS growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
695.33%
Positive diluted EPS growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
16.06%
Slight or no buybacks while MTDR is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
13.32%
Slight or no buyback while MTDR is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
-13.05%
Dividend reduction while MTDR stands at 0.08%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
185.43%
Positive OCF growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
359.97%
Positive FCF growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
96.87%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 690.14%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
96.87%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 1272.50%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
133.35%
Positive 3Y CAGR while MTDR is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
582.93%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 1566.28%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
582.93%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MTDR's 362.73%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
739.11%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MTDR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
2356.55%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MTDR's 163.75% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
2356.55%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MTDR's 139.65%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
1208.71%
Positive short-term CAGR while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
225.79%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of MTDR's 274.37%. Bill Ackman would push for either higher ROE or more earnings retention to catch the competitor.
225.79%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MTDR's 204.54%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
178.43%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x MTDR's 101.40%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
242.32%
Dividend/share CAGR of 242.32% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
242.32%
Dividend/share CAGR of 242.32% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
226.57%
Below 50% of MTDR's 529.33%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
-34.82%
Firm’s AR is declining while MTDR shows 2.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-84.84%
Inventory is declining while MTDR stands at 23.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.50%
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.
0.02%
Under 50% of MTDR's 2.09%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-19.67%
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.
-10.02%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.