205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
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.
5.78%
Positive revenue growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
1.19%
Positive gross profit growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
8.44%
Positive EBIT growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
8.44%
Positive operating income growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
3.96%
Positive net income growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
5.56%
Positive EPS growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
5.56%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.59%
Share count expansion well above AMD's 0.14%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.84%
Diluted share count expanding well above AMD's 0.01%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
38.32%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while AMD cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
30.10%
Positive OCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
26.88%
Positive FCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
129.53%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to AMD's 140.20%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
77.01%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 69.80%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
44.21%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 37.91%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2867.62%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 223.69%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
31.90%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
378.63%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 291.31%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
3684.73%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 330.68%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
303.89%
Positive short-term CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
37.08%
Below 50% of AMD's 116.98%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
53.77%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 74.26%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
20.80%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while AMD is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
10.83%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while AMD cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
13.60%
Our AR growth while AMD is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
5.04%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. AMD's 14.96%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
8.58%
Asset growth above 1.5x AMD's 2.28%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
7.55%
BV/share growth above 1.5x AMD's 3.54%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
4.60%
We have some new debt while AMD reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
2.79%
We increase R&D while AMD cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-5.72%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.