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.
13.24%
Revenue growth above 1.5x AEM's 0.64%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
8.19%
Positive gross profit growth while AEM is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
7.00%
EBIT growth above 1.5x AEM's 1.96%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
7.00%
Operating income growth above 1.5x AEM's 1.96%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
3.04%
Positive net income growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2.86%
Positive EPS growth while AEM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
2.86%
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.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while AEM stands at 1.39%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
11.63%
Positive OCF growth while AEM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-63.01%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
60.86%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to AEM's 57.57%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
54.95%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of AEM's 72.21%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
60.21%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AEM's 54.56%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
43.28%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with AEM's 44.79%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
82.95%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 121.13%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
82.43%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AEM's 64.17%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
4.10%
Below 50% of AEM's 122.97%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
254.38%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 372.53%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
134.22%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of AEM's 209.29%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
90.98%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 5.67%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
25.60%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AEM's 20.88%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
16.45%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 10.19%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while AEM stands at 96.38%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital 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.
-14.20%
Firm’s AR is declining while AEM shows 37.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-31.41%
Inventory is declining while AEM stands at 6.20%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.48%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
1.90%
Positive BV/share change while AEM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-98.25%
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.
16.98%
SG&A growth well above AEM's 32.51%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.