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 at 50-75% of VET's 9.46%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
92.74%
Gross profit growth under 50% of VET's 205.80%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
9.56%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x VET's 7.98%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
9.56%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x VET's 7.98%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
49.12%
Net income growth under 50% of VET's 162.72%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
50.78%
EPS growth under 50% of VET's 161.54%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
51.18%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of VET's 162.75%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.54%
Share reduction while VET is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.53%
Reduced diluted shares while VET is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.45%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while VET cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
1.38%
Positive OCF growth while VET is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
22.62%
Positive FCF growth while VET is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-42.48%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
25.40%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 13.30%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
27.45%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VET is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-16.96%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
36.47%
Positive OCF/share growth while VET is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
23.48%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VET is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-89.79%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
243.51%
Below 50% of VET's 591.87%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
790.85%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 135.61%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-36.56%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
8.42%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of VET's 10.56%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
175.31%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VET's 68.12%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
-13.51%
Both reduced dividends long-term. Martin Whitman might check if sector-level headwinds forced universal cuts.
228.10%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while VET is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
106.82%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 106.82% while VET is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
6.20%
AR growth well above VET's 6.13%. 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.
257.99%
Positive asset growth while VET is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.78%
BV/share growth above 1.5x VET's 1.69%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-3.10%
We’re deleveraging while VET stands at 1.64%. 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%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.