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.
-58.56%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-71.47%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-119.12%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-119.12%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-133.89%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-134.37%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-134.90%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.28%
Share reduction while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.55%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-1.06%
Dividend reduction while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
215.67%
Positive OCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
81.87%
Positive FCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
4.05%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-51.60%
Negative 5Y CAGR while VTLE stands at 20.03%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-71.32%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
144.96%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
20.20%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of VTLE's 25.81%. Bill Ackman would push for operational improvements to match competitor’s mid-term gains.
-54.81%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-309.87%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VTLE is at 58.99%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-171.02%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while VTLE is 67.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-138.27%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
145.45%
Positive growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
46.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of VTLE's 73.01%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
-0.10%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while VTLE is at 38.15%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
396.94%
Dividend/share CAGR of 396.94% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
162.38%
Dividend/share CAGR of 162.38% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
6.81%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 6.81% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
12.34%
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.
-80.00%
Inventory is declining while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-3.69%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-5.39%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.65%
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.
30.49%
SG&A growth well above VTLE's 51.85%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.