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.
-15.81%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-23.27%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-256.60%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-256.60%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-317.43%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-315.38%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-315.38%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.31%
Share count expansion well above FNV's 0.11%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.30%
Diluted share count expanding well above FNV's 0.11%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-7.56%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-8.06%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
205.89%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 106.37%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
2.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 24.57%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-12.59%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FNV stands at 7.32%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
176.09%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of FNV's 226.67%. Bill Ackman would demand strategic changes to close the gap in long-term cash generation.
-14.51%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FNV is at 88.94%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-20.28%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FNV stands at 37.45%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-552.06%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while FNV is at 39.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-257.57%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while FNV is 36.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-302.57%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FNV is 43.70%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
161.66%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 46.32%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
17.18%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of FNV's 24.46%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
3.49%
Below 50% of FNV's 9.66%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
13.77%
5Y dividend/share CAGR at 50-75% of FNV's 20.61%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging policy in mid-term shareholder returns.
69.37%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 14.17%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-27.48%
Firm’s AR is declining while FNV shows 3.21%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-100.00%
Inventory is declining while FNV stands at 56.52%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-3.67%
Negative asset growth while FNV invests at 7.06%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.48%
We have a declining book value while FNV shows 1.41%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-7.41%
We’re deleveraging while FNV stands at 171.88%. 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.
-26.45%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.