PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
-1.49%
Negative revenue growth while Technology median is -2.35%. Seth Klarman would investigate if the company is losing market share or facing a declining industry.
-2.01%
Negative gross profit growth while Technology median is -1.55%. Seth Klarman would suspect poor product pricing or inefficient production.
-1.42%
Negative EBIT growth while Technology median is -4.93%. Seth Klarman would check if external or internal factors caused the decline.
0.44%
Positive operating income growth while Technology is negative. Peter Lynch would spot a big relative advantage here.
-4.70%
Negative net income growth while Technology median is -8.33%. Seth Klarman would investigate factors dragging net income down.
-4.35%
Negative EPS growth while Technology median is -7.69%. Seth Klarman would explore whether share dilution or profit declines are to blame.
-4.35%
Negative diluted EPS growth while Technology median is -6.56%. Seth Klarman would look for the cause: weakened profitability or heavier share issuance.
-0.46%
Share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see a relative advantage if others are diluting.
-0.54%
Diluted share reduction while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see an advantage if others are still diluting.
0.15%
Dividend growth of 0.15% while Technology median is flat. Walter Schloss might appreciate at least a modest improvement.
-61.47%
Negative OCF growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would ask if accounting or macro issues hamper the firm specifically.
-64.74%
Negative FCF growth while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would see if others in the industry are still generating positive expansions in free cash.
62.88%
10Y revenue/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 17.22%. Joel Greenblatt would verify if a unique moat or brand fosters outperformance over a decade.
68.66%
5Y revenue/share growth exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 16.82%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company’s moat drives rapid mid-term expansion.
-5.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while Technology median is 7.72%. Seth Klarman would examine if the sector is otherwise stable, indicating a company-specific issue.
88.46%
OCF/share CAGR of 88.46% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest edge that can add up if momentum improves.
117.10%
OCF/share CAGR of 117.10% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a slight advantage that can compound if momentum builds.
-3.34%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman would check whether it’s cyclical or a firm-specific problem.
112.73%
Net income/share CAGR exceeding 1.5x Technology median of 43.05% over a decade. Joel Greenblatt might see a standout compounder of earnings.
3278.82%
5Y net income/share CAGR > 1.5x Technology median of 50.41%. Joel Greenblatt might see superior mid-term capital allocation or product strength.
-21.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while Technology median is 0.13%. Seth Klarman might see a pressing concern if the rest of the sector is stable or growing.
40.88%
Equity/share CAGR of 40.88% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest advantage in net worth accumulation that could matter long term.
36.00%
5Y equity/share CAGR of 36.00% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss sees a slight positive that might compound if management executes well.
8.43%
3Y equity/share CAGR near Technology median. Charlie Munger notes it as typical short-term equity expansion in the sector.
1308.17%
Dividend/share CAGR of 1308.17% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees a minor improvement that could compound if the firm maintains consistent raises.
171.86%
5Y dividend/share CAGR of 171.86% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees at least some improvement that could compound over time.
129.32%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 129.32% while Technology is zero. Walter Schloss sees a slight advantage if the firm is at least inching up payouts.
12.64%
AR growth of 12.64% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss checks if the difference points to new credit strategy or stronger sales push.
-0.98%
Decreasing inventory while Technology is rising. Seth Klarman might see an efficiency advantage or possibly a sign of weaker sales future.
-0.02%
Assets shrink while Technology median grows. Seth Klarman might see a strategic refocus or potential missed expansion if demand is present.
-1.28%
Negative BV/share change while Technology median is 0.00%. Seth Klarman sees a firm-specific weakness if peers accumulate net worth.
9.58%
Debt growth of 9.58% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss might see a modest difference that matters if interest coverage is tight.
5.78%
R&D growth of 5.78% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss wonders if a slight increase yields a meaningful competitive edge.
3.90%
SG&A growth of 3.90% while Technology median is zero. Walter Schloss sees a modest overhead increase needing revenue justification.