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.
-8.81%
Negative revenue growth while FNV stands at 2.23%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-8.81%
Negative gross profit growth while FNV is at 6.01%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-197.39%
Negative EBIT growth while FNV is at 19.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-197.39%
Negative operating income growth while FNV is at 8.68%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-197.36%
Negative net income growth while FNV stands at 20.08%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-198.04%
Negative EPS growth while FNV is at 17.43%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-198.04%
Negative diluted EPS growth while FNV is at 17.43%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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.
-92.39%
Negative OCF growth while FNV is at 48.94%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-92.39%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
13.24%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 177.64%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
13.24%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 85.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
8.73%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FNV's 6.49%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than 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.
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.
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.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
7.50%
Our AR growth while FNV is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
7.03%
We show growth while FNV is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
3.74%
Asset growth at 50-75% of FNV's 5.52%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
3.49%
50-75% of FNV's 4.86%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation 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.
9.49%
We expand SG&A while FNV cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.