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.
3.16%
Positive revenue growth while VET is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-17.99%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-56.00%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-56.00%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-89.54%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-90.63%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-90.63%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.03%
Share reduction more than 1.5x VET's 0.37%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.36%
Dividend reduction while VET stands at 0.03%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
37.95%
OCF growth under 50% of VET's 2702.19%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
55.02%
Positive FCF growth while VET is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
65.93%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of VET's 272.85%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
94.28%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 56.32%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
6.58%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VET is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
213.68%
Positive OCF/share growth while VET is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
75.55%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 31.25%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-90.22%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VET is at 150.03%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-92.17%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while VET is 29.78%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-98.02%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
575.59%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 275.84%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
154.17%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 48.54%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
45.39%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 20.72%. 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.
723.35%
5Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 11.80%. David Dodd checks if the firm's mid-term cash flows justify a faster dividend growth rate.
303.91%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 11.82%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
7.14%
Our AR growth while VET is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
2.39%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. VET's 35.13%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
9.58%
Asset growth well under 50% of VET's 19.49%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.91%
Positive BV/share change while VET is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
59.39%
Debt growth far above VET's 50.86%. 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.
20.83%
SG&A growth well above VET's 6.99%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.