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.
89.93%
Revenue growth above 1.5x VET's 7.50%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
309.76%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x VET's 4.94%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
971.26%
EBIT growth above 1.5x VET's 8.87%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
971.26%
Operating income growth above 1.5x VET's 8.87%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
663.07%
Net income growth above 1.5x VET's 27.70%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
661.70%
EPS growth above 1.5x VET's 25.71%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
654.26%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x VET's 26.63%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-0.08%
Share reduction while VET is at 1.32%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
1.24%
Diluted share count expanding well above VET's 0.49%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
23.17%
Dividend growth of 23.17% while VET is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
96.20%
OCF growth above 1.5x VET's 55.51%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
255.98%
FCF growth above 1.5x VET's 63.16%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
192.62%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 122.69%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
161.01%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to VET's 148.94%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
95.23%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x VET's 72.39%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
21.95%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of VET's 155.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
366.46%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 201.31%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
59.30%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of VET's 193.39%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
152.43%
Below 50% of VET's 470.84%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
210.19%
Below 50% of VET's 450.37%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
333.70%
Below 50% of VET's 16925.46%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
-51.25%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while VET stands at 16.46%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-35.07%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while VET is at 19.21%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-37.58%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-75.07%
Both reduced dividends long-term. Martin Whitman might check if sector-level headwinds forced universal cuts.
245.88%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while VET is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
174.91%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while VET cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
6.23%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.15%
Asset growth well under 50% of VET's 1.33%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
24.37%
BV/share growth above 1.5x VET's 13.66%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-15.45%
We’re deleveraging while VET stands at 9.97%. 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.
-5.15%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.