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.
4.97%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MTDR's 0.58%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
92.74%
Positive gross profit growth while MTDR is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
9.56%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MTDR's 5.48%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
9.56%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MTDR's 5.48%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
49.12%
Net income growth above 1.5x MTDR's 8.53%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
50.78%
EPS growth above 1.5x MTDR's 8.74%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
51.18%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MTDR's 8.74%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-1.54%
Share reduction while MTDR is at 0.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.53%
Reduced diluted shares while MTDR is at 0.07%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.45%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while MTDR cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
1.38%
OCF growth under 50% of MTDR's 2.95%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
22.62%
FCF growth under 50% of MTDR's 66.90%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-42.48%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MTDR stands at 350.43%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
25.40%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 187.70%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
27.45%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 70.71%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-16.96%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while MTDR stands at 436.29%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
36.47%
Below 50% of MTDR's 259.63%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
23.48%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MTDR's 96.50%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-89.79%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MTDR is at 392.58%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
243.51%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of MTDR's 427.92%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
790.85%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x MTDR's 14.31%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-36.56%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while MTDR stands at 249.73%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
8.42%
Below 50% of MTDR's 153.54%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
175.31%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to MTDR's 170.50%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
-13.51%
Cut dividends over 10 years while MTDR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
228.10%
Dividend/share CAGR of 228.10% while MTDR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
106.82%
Below 50% of MTDR's 699.20%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
6.20%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. MTDR's 689.28%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
257.99%
Asset growth above 1.5x MTDR's 24.71%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
4.78%
Similar to MTDR's 4.93%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
-3.10%
We’re deleveraging while MTDR stands at 85.85%. 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.
-6.49%
We cut SG&A while MTDR invests at 3.13%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.