PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
215.00 - 235.00
210.00 - 590.00
2.95M / 482.4K (Avg.)
11.40 | 0.20
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
144.26%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCB.L's 83.84%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
144.26%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MCB.L is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
82.96%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MCB.L's 7.10%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
64.47%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with MCB.L's 65.65%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
64.47%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MCB.L's 54.80%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
31.20%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x MCB.L's 0.33%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-31.08%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MCB.L is at 118.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-31.08%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MCB.L is 212.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-27.89%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MCB.L is 2.04%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
63.86%
Dividend/share CAGR of 63.86% while MCB.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
63.86%
Dividend/share CAGR of 63.86% while MCB.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
35.34%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 35.34% while MCB.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.