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.
-4.59%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
14.76%
Positive gross profit growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
53.69%
Positive EBIT growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
53.69%
Positive operating income growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-13.75%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-13.92%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-12.26%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-24.01%
Share reduction while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-24.17%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
31.72%
Dividend growth of 31.72% while VTLE is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-45.29%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-407.69%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
54.38%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
54.38%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 20.03%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
54.38%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
75.24%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
75.24%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 25.81%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
75.24%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-16.69%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VTLE is at 58.99%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-16.69%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while VTLE is 67.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-16.69%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
33.77%
Positive growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
33.77%
Below 50% of VTLE's 73.01%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
33.77%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of VTLE's 38.15%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
24.75%
Dividend/share CAGR of 24.75% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
24.75%
Dividend/share CAGR of 24.75% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
24.75%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 24.75% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
13.47%
Our AR growth while VTLE is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
99.73%
Inventory growth of 99.73% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
16.86%
Positive asset growth while VTLE is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
32.04%
Positive BV/share change while VTLE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
49.83%
We have some new debt while VTLE reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-78.47%
We cut SG&A while VTLE invests at 51.85%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.