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.
-8.95%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-18.89%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-41.45%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-41.45%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-55.65%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-54.10%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-54.10%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-4.20%
Share reduction while VTLE is at 0.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-4.20%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
0.21%
Dividend growth of 0.21% while VTLE is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-16.56%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
21.79%
Positive FCF growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-72.63%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 73.79%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-54.13%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
23.99%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to VTLE's 22.81%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
-84.08%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 72.24%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-39.15%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
163.69%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 0.19%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
238.41%
Positive 10Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-97.03%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-69.51%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-77.43%
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.
-41.49%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
3.28%
Below 50% of VTLE's 484.60%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-95.46%
Cut dividends over 10 years while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-73.64%
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.
19.77%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 19.77% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-4.75%
Firm’s AR is declining while VTLE shows 7.52%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.80%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
3.40%
Positive BV/share change while VTLE is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-1.05%
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.
-2.84%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.