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.
91.95%
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.
91.95%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of SOM.L's 167.09%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
88.76%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SOM.L's 44.57%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
136.47%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SOM.L's 52.67%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
136.47%
Below 50% of SOM.L's 474.78%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
10.67%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SOM.L's 60.67%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
23.49%
Below 50% of SOM.L's 62.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
23.49%
Below 50% of SOM.L's 1711.64%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
43.22%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SOM.L's 26.74%. 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.15%
Below 50% of SOM.L's 639.99%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
14.15%
Dividend/share CAGR of 14.15% while SOM.L is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
-66.74%
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.