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.
-20.50%
Negative revenue growth while VTLE stands at 10.06%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-37.39%
Negative gross profit growth while VTLE is at 15.08%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-101.25%
Negative EBIT growth while VTLE is at 16.12%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-101.25%
Negative operating income growth while VTLE is at 16.12%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-11.18%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-11.76%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-11.76%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.01%
Share reduction more than 1.5x VTLE's 0.03%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.01%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x VTLE's 0.19%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-0.01%
Dividend reduction while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
63.76%
OCF growth above 1.5x VTLE's 23.66%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
41.12%
Positive FCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-88.22%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 78.78%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-36.46%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-71.30%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-87.64%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 81.70%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-76.35%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-60.94%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-75.90%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
117.88%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-92.02%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-73.12%
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.
-4.54%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-44.15%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-92.85%
Cut dividends over 10 years while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-92.80%
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.
-79.09%
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.
-1.30%
Firm’s AR is declining while VTLE shows 30.96%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.03%
Asset growth well under 50% of VTLE's 6.44%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.67%
Under 50% of VTLE's 6.69%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
0.48%
Debt shrinking faster vs. VTLE's 3.65%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
23.91%
SG&A growth well above VTLE's 13.60%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.