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.
68.88%
Positive revenue growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
144.69%
Positive gross profit growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
2810.71%
Positive EBIT growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
2810.71%
Positive operating income growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
7116.67%
Net income growth above 1.5x VTLE's 197.26%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
7112.99%
EPS growth above 1.5x VTLE's 197.03%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
7236.56%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x VTLE's 196.55%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.04%
Share reduction more than 1.5x VTLE's 0.28%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-1.80%
Reduced diluted shares while VTLE is at 0.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-4.04%
Dividend reduction while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-22.47%
Negative OCF growth while VTLE is at 1.28%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-243.59%
Negative FCF growth while VTLE is at 72.22%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-57.55%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while VTLE stands at 2.96%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
23.45%
Positive 5Y CAGR while VTLE is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
52.64%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 11.33%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
141.75%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while VTLE is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-31.50%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while VTLE is at 185.15%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
299.96%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x VTLE's 76.36%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-83.91%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while VTLE is at 2608.17%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
114.39%
Below 50% of VTLE's 34917.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-26.83%
Negative 3Y CAGR while VTLE is 129.94%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-67.37%
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.
-37.53%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
16.99%
Below 50% of VTLE's 338.19%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-90.83%
Cut dividends over 10 years while VTLE stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-63.16%
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.
19.85%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 19.85% while VTLE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
4.80%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.08%
Asset growth well under 50% of VTLE's 15.00%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
2.59%
Under 50% of VTLE's 27.89%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-2.20%
We’re deleveraging while VTLE stands at 6.87%. 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.
2038.10%
We expand SG&A while VTLE cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.