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.
-100.00%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SOM.L stands at 167.09%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SOM.L stands at 44.57%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-100.00%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SOM.L stands at 52.67%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SOM.L is at 474.78%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SOM.L stands at 60.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-100.00%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while SOM.L is at 62.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SOM.L is 1711.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SOM.L is 26.74%. 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.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while SOM.L stands at 639.99%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while SOM.L stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-100.00%
Negative near-term dividend growth while SOM.L invests at 781.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
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.