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.
1.94%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of AEM's 3.42%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
3.70%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of AEM's 6.74%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
-0.01%
Negative EBIT growth while AEM is at 8.76%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-0.01%
Negative operating income growth while AEM is at 8.76%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
2.54%
Net income growth under 50% of AEM's 35.22%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
2.78%
EPS growth under 50% of AEM's 35.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
2.78%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of AEM's 35.59%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.13%
Share count expansion well above AEM's 0.14%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.13%
Diluted share count expanding well above AEM's 0.24%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-6.78%
Negative OCF growth while AEM is at 14.18%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
97.38%
FCF growth above 1.5x AEM's 62.74%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
33.15%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 54.77%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
50.97%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of AEM's 64.10%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
53.17%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of AEM's 66.21%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
0.93%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 73.60%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
56.40%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to AEM's 61.91%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
57.62%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AEM's 224.22%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-11.94%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while AEM is at 98.21%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
167.29%
Below 50% of AEM's 844.20%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-48.58%
Negative 3Y CAGR while AEM is 3679.37%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
90.57%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 6.45%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
19.17%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of AEM's 22.26%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
11.80%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of AEM's 13.77%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
666.81%
10Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x AEM's 99.75%. David Dodd checks if the firm's robust cash flows justify outpacing the competitor's increases.
173.48%
5Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of AEM's 298.68%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging policy in mid-term shareholder returns.
57.86%
Below 50% of AEM's 230.33%. Michael Burry suspects the firm invests elsewhere or can’t match the competitor’s dividend policy.
139.98%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. AEM's 466.56%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-1.95%
Inventory is declining while AEM stands at 6.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
0.89%
Asset growth well under 50% of AEM's 3.83%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.93%
50-75% of AEM's 2.93%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-4.69%
We’re deleveraging while AEM stands at 0.28%. 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.
68.08%
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.