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.
40.27%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SOM.L is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
40.27%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SOM.L's 264.40%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
40.27%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of SOM.L's 76.81%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
41.74%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SOM.L's 65.28%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
41.74%
Below 50% of SOM.L's 2399.45%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
41.74%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SOM.L's 112.22%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-25.02%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while SOM.L is at 44.85%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-25.02%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SOM.L is 713.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-25.02%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SOM.L is 166.18%. 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.
80.64%
Dividend/share CAGR of 80.64% while SOM.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
80.64%
Dividend/share CAGR of 80.64% while SOM.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
80.64%
Below 50% of SOM.L's 340.93%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
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.