PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM)
96.701.20 (1.26%)
95.23 - 97.14
55.47 - 103.81
1.63M / 1.80M (Avg.)
55.57 | 1.74
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.
-14.48%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-14.48%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
219.35%
Positive EBIT growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
219.35%
Positive operating income growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
311.06%
Positive net income growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
975.86%
Positive EPS growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
975.86%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
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.
835.87%
Positive OCF growth while AEM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
835.87%
Positive FCF growth while AEM is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
7.47%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
7.47%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 18.55%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
7.47%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 227.85%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
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.
-24.39%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while AEM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-24.39%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AEM is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-24.39%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while AEM is at 31.66%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
32.57%
AR growth of 32.57% while AEM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-6.58%
Inventory is declining while AEM stands at 5.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.06%
Positive asset growth while AEM is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.07%
BV/share growth above 1.5x AEM's 0.85%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-148.44%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.