PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
14.14%
Positive revenue growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
28.42%
Positive gross profit growth while AEM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
30.60%
Positive EBIT growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
30.60%
Positive operating income growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
22.41%
Positive net income growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
23.53%
Positive EPS growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
23.53%
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.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while AEM stands at 9.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
34.67%
Positive OCF growth while AEM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
35.67%
Positive FCF growth while AEM is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
126.65%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 83.60%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
61.68%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 24.41%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
26.90%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 16.21%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
135.70%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 43.41%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
65.00%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 1.97%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
45.99%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
62.55%
Positive 10Y CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
59.02%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
52.81%
Positive short-term CAGR while AEM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
125.25%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 17.51%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
-2.02%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while AEM is at 10.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
3.78%
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.
-99.93%
Firm’s AR is declining while AEM shows 693.34%. 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.
-3.20%
Negative asset growth while AEM invests at 10.31%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.65%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-18.14%
We’re deleveraging while AEM stands at 53.21%. 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.
-5.92%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.