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.
0.61%
Positive revenue growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-0.39%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-0.39%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-0.39%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
21.86%
Positive net income growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
18.18%
Positive EPS growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
18.18%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.48%
Share count expansion well above AEM's 0.30%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.39%
Diluted share count expanding well above AEM's 0.09%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-10.15%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
4.99%
OCF growth under 50% of AEM's 67.87%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-6.13%
Negative FCF growth while AEM is at 104.65%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
238.75%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 414.48%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
241.38%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 416.75%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
10.52%
Positive 3Y CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
110932.14%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 1060.52%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
343.50%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to AEM's 361.64%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
-1.33%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AEM stands at 45.97%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
1134.29%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
242.41%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-24.60%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
3212.75%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 261.69%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
186.70%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 5.69%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
46.96%
Positive short-term equity growth while AEM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
-38.02%
Firm’s AR is declining while AEM shows 4.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-100.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-0.20%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.91%
Positive BV/share change while AEM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-4.02%
We’re deleveraging while AEM stands at 5.32%. 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.
-15.28%
We cut SG&A while AEM invests at 6.96%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.