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.
18.01%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of AEM's 29.69%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
42.43%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of AEM's 81.69%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
173.43%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x AEM's 132.77%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
173.43%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x AEM's 132.77%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
160.92%
Net income growth comparable to AEM's 176.06%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
160.71%
EPS growth similar to AEM's 166.67%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
160.71%
Similar diluted EPS growth to AEM's 166.67%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.23%
Share reduction more than 1.5x AEM's 1.18%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.31%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x AEM's 1.31%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-48.78%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
30.24%
OCF growth under 50% of AEM's 176.51%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
30.44%
FCF growth under 50% of AEM's 192.30%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
124.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 199.83%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
8.13%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 29.13%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-5.44%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AEM stands at 5.22%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
119.98%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 1759.76%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-5.19%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while AEM is at 329.49%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-13.15%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AEM stands at 16.20%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
58.76%
Below 50% of AEM's 396.09%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
1255.10%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 546.33%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-9.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AEM is 46.09%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
121.53%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 16.62%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
15.88%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 5.53%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
3.35%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 0.94%. 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.
45.92%
5Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AEM's 32.39%. Bruce Berkowitz verifies that high dividend hikes remain sustainable, not a sign of over-distribution.
66.54%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while AEM cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
156.25%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. AEM's 1276.69%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.29%
Asset growth well under 50% of AEM's 2.67%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.52%
75-90% of AEM's 1.73%. Bill Ackman advocates improvements in profitability or buybacks to keep pace in net worth growth.
-7.47%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
7.56%
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.