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.
-15.06%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-15.06%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-1735.83%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1735.83%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-3021.48%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-2983.33%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-2983.33%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
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.
-1836.26%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-1836.26%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-10.91%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while FSM stands at 149.07%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-10.91%
Negative 5Y CAGR while FSM stands at 188.92%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-10.91%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSM stands at 30.54%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
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.
8.40%
Our AR growth while FSM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
6.46%
We show growth while FSM is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-26.32%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-26.93%
We have a declining book value while FSM shows 0.78%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation 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.
-0.28%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.