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.
-18.58%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-40.04%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-37.43%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-37.43%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
46.26%
Positive net income growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
49.37%
Positive EPS growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
49.94%
Positive diluted EPS growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-16.13%
Share reduction while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-16.23%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
52.63%
Dividend growth of 52.63% while VTLE is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
1.12%
Positive OCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
25.48%
Positive FCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
139.84%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
139.84%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 20.03%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
152.42%
Positive 3Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
467.41%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
467.41%
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.
195.65%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
697.91%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 58.99% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
697.91%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 67.00%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
332.86%
Positive short-term CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
135.21%
Positive growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
135.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 73.01%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
149.39%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 38.15%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
146.65%
Dividend/share CAGR of 146.65% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
146.65%
Dividend/share CAGR of 146.65% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
173.31%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 173.31% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-3.17%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
21.05%
Inventory growth of 21.05% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
4.76%
Positive asset growth while VTLE is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
29.82%
Positive BV/share change while VTLE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-1.07%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-89.96%
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.