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.
-4.91%
Negative revenue growth while AEM stands at 20.02%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-5.35%
Negative gross profit growth while AEM is at 28.25%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-3.96%
Negative EBIT growth while AEM is at 54.81%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-3.96%
Negative operating income growth while AEM is at 54.81%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-8.80%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-9.52%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-9.52%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.02%
Share reduction more than 1.5x AEM's 0.12%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.03%
Slight or no buyback while AEM is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.02%
Dividend growth under 50% of AEM's 0.98%. Michael Burry might suspect more pressing needs for cash or weaker earnings power.
-0.62%
Negative OCF growth while AEM is at 21.34%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-82.43%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
56.04%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 925.32%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
176.47%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 240.34%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
229.79%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 371.94%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
12196.64%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 2317.38%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
268.99%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 90.06%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
426.39%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 837.62%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
10696.01%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
273.92%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
367.76%
Positive short-term CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
2022.77%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 587.91%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
155.80%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AEM's 116.92%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
97.53%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 46.23%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
39.73%
AR growth well above AEM's 21.53%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.66%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
3.38%
Positive BV/share change while AEM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-7.69%
We’re deleveraging while AEM stands at 8.08%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.94%
We expand SG&A while AEM cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.