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.
407.82%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SDI.L's 229.40%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
164.56%
5Y CAGR of 164.56% while SDI.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
33.01%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SDI.L's 163.56%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-175.69%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SDI.L stands at 26.18%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-132.01%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SDI.L is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-138.62%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
109.51%
Below 50% of SDI.L's 15699.73%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
69.66%
Net income/share CAGR of 69.66% while SDI.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
1736.70%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SDI.L's 203.91%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
100.88%
Equity/share CAGR of 100.88% while SDI.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
0.73%
Below 50% of SDI.L's 107.90%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while SDI.L stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while SDI.L stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
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.