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.
-27.76%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-37.06%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-31.50%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-31.50%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
31.79%
Positive net income growth while FNV is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
30.30%
Positive EPS growth while FNV is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
30.30%
Positive diluted EPS growth while FNV is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.05%
Share change of 0.05% while FNV is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.01%
Diluted share change of 0.01% while FNV is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
-52.12%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-25.13%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-43.96%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
6.31%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 118.94%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
5.48%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 71.46%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-3.20%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FNV stands at 26.24%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-5.92%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FNV stands at 154.91%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
17.09%
Below 50% of FNV's 93.58%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
7.38%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 33.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
28.59%
Below 50% of FNV's 128.75%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
188.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FNV's 153.10%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
155.80%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 51.24%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
72.43%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 46.94%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
26.47%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of FNV's 29.57%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
24.52%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to FNV's 24.64%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
24.20%
Below 50% of FNV's 58.80%. Michael Burry might see weaker long-term distribution growth, raising questions about the firm's capital allocation.
49.75%
5Y dividend/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FNV's 38.34%. Bruce Berkowitz verifies that high dividend hikes remain sustainable, not a sign of over-distribution.
70.16%
3Y dividend/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 35.30%. David Dodd sees a superior short-term capital return strategy if supported by stable earnings.
-31.31%
Firm’s AR is declining while FNV shows 3.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-5.56%
Inventory is declining while FNV stands at 75.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.15%
Asset growth above 1.5x FNV's 0.52%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
2.00%
BV/share growth above 1.5x FNV's 0.40%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-11.95%
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.
-23.88%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.