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.
-23.42%
Negative revenue growth while FNV stands at 11.20%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-18.86%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-23.52%
Negative EBIT growth while FNV is at 485.57%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-23.52%
Negative operating income growth while FNV is at 13700.00%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
463.45%
Net income growth under 50% of FNV's 1113.33%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
460.00%
EPS growth under 50% of FNV's 1107.75%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
460.00%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of FNV's 1072.76%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive 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%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-31.36%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-31.00%
Negative FCF growth while FNV is at 320.15%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
124.38%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FNV's 220.31%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
-20.60%
Negative 5Y CAGR while FNV stands at 28.91%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-3.10%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FNV stands at 36.81%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
100.65%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 512.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-41.38%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FNV is at 11.65%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-15.46%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FNV stands at 55.33%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
22.82%
Below 50% of FNV's 347.96%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-66.69%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-37.90%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FNV is 6.23%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
256.57%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 39.52%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
44.22%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 6.64%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
17.38%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to FNV's 15.82%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
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.
43.26%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.10%
Negative asset growth while FNV invests at 0.62%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
0.73%
Positive BV/share change while FNV is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-10.81%
We’re deleveraging while FNV stands at 0.00%. 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.
114.57%
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.