PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
-44.59%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-54.72%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-96.32%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-96.32%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-962.12%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-940.30%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-940.30%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
2.25%
Share reduction more than 1.5x VTLE's 14.82%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
2.25%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x VTLE's 13.04%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-25.67%
Dividend reduction while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
84.67%
Positive OCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
57.38%
Positive FCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-51.03%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 8.27%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-65.61%
Negative 5Y CAGR while VTLE stands at 8.27%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-32.54%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-64.35%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
160.94%
Positive OCF/share growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-24.10%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-5303.17%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-211.83%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-13921.41%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-0.16%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-47.77%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while VTLE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
9.13%
Below 50% of VTLE's 129.61%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
23.02%
Dividend/share CAGR of 23.02% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
-75.11%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-74.88%
Negative near-term dividend growth while VTLE invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-48.24%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
68.33%
We show growth while VTLE is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-7.25%
Negative asset growth while VTLE invests at 18.37%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-3.90%
We have a declining book value while VTLE shows 29.21%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-3.85%
We’re deleveraging while VTLE stands at 2.77%. 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.
-0.48%
We cut SG&A while VTLE invests at 0.44%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.