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.
5.24%
Revenue growth under 50% of MTDR's 21.03%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-7.67%
Negative gross profit growth while MTDR is at 33.31%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-12.05%
Negative EBIT growth while MTDR is at 34.78%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-12.05%
Negative operating income growth while MTDR is at 34.78%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
20.83%
Net income growth under 50% of MTDR's 60.17%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
9.63%
EPS growth under 50% of MTDR's 60.14%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
9.70%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MTDR's 60.58%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
9.74%
Slight or no buybacks while MTDR is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
10.17%
Diluted share count expanding well above MTDR's 0.20%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-8.95%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
9.03%
OCF growth above 1.5x MTDR's 2.66%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
-62.30%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
2.67%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 426.86%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
46.50%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 264.04%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
111.30%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 269.67%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-47.72%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while MTDR stands at 418.62%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-28.55%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MTDR is at 172.65%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
74.44%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 309.56%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
16.51%
Below 50% of MTDR's 538.76%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
626.55%
Below 50% of MTDR's 1347.48%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
125.34%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of MTDR's 193.01%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
-4.80%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while MTDR stands at 222.71%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
2.66%
Below 50% of MTDR's 131.20%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
108.34%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of MTDR's 159.91%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-58.43%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MTDR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
310.98%
Dividend/share CAGR of 310.98% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
226.06%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 226.06% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
21.27%
AR growth well above MTDR's 14.36%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.95%
Asset growth well under 50% of MTDR's 4.30%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-6.57%
We have a declining book value while MTDR shows 7.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-0.14%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-19.31%
We cut SG&A while MTDR invests at 18.78%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.