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.
17.46%
Positive revenue growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
25.99%
Positive gross profit growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
51.31%
Positive EBIT growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
54.85%
Positive operating income growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
29.41%
Net income growth under 50% of AMD's 162.24%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
31.25%
EPS growth under 50% of AMD's 161.36%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
25.00%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of AMD's 161.36%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.26%
Slight or no buybacks while AMD is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.57%
Slight or no buyback while AMD is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
2.76%
Dividend growth of 2.76% while AMD is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
42.40%
Positive OCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
260.00%
Positive FCF growth while AMD is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
18.29%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AMD's 135.56%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-12.42%
Negative 5Y CAGR while AMD stands at 47.92%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-5.56%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AMD stands at 140.75%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.54%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
77.15%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
150.39%
Below 50% of AMD's 618.51%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
64.61%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 13.60%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
310.75%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of AMD's 524.25%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
130.52%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 66.85%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
48.58%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 74.40%. Martin Whitman sees a short-term lag in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
88.55%
Dividend/share CAGR of 88.55% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
83.56%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while AMD is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
-0.18%
Negative near-term dividend growth while AMD invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
18.90%
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.
7.49%
Inventory growth well above AMD's 11.16%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-0.61%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.37%
Under 50% of AMD's 107.96%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-2.08%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
17.36%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. AMD's 4.58%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
4.02%
We expand SG&A while AMD cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.