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.
-0.04%
Negative revenue growth while VET stands at 14.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-10.64%
Negative gross profit growth while VET is at 10.50%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-21.50%
Negative EBIT growth while VET is at 22.86%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-21.50%
Negative operating income growth while VET is at 22.86%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-35.24%
Negative net income growth while VET stands at 18.49%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-34.91%
Negative EPS growth while VET is at 17.74%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-34.22%
Negative diluted EPS growth while VET is at 18.33%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-7.58%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-7.72%
Reduced diluted shares while VET is at 0.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
7.77%
Dividend growth at 75-90% of VET's 9.93%. Bill Ackman would press for a stronger return if the balance sheet allows.
2.36%
OCF growth under 50% of VET's 17.63%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-43.26%
Negative FCF growth while VET is at 207.66%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
141.25%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of VET's 682.46%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
294.39%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 144.96%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
182.48%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x VET's 130.61%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
535.10%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 94.71%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
159.28%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 48.65%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
268.40%
Below 50% of VET's 1005.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
833.89%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 479.18%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
194.88%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of VET's 317.25%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
441.52%
10Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x VET's 341.31%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strong ROE or conservative payout policy fosters faster book value growth.
202.11%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 80.43%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
103.73%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 48.51%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
355.97%
Dividend/share CAGR of 355.97% while VET is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
314.57%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 9.82%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-3.46%
Firm’s AR is declining while VET shows 14.84%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
12.45%
We show growth while VET is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
4.76%
Asset growth at 75-90% of VET's 5.52%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
16.95%
1.25-1.5x VET's 15.03%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
-2.17%
We’re deleveraging while VET stands at 9.42%. 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.
-22.95%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.