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.
100.00%
Revenue growth of 100.00% while FSM is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a small edge can widen further.
100.00%
Gross profit growth of 100.00% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal improvements could expand further.
64.36%
EBIT growth above 1.5x FSM's 35.30%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
64.36%
Operating income growth above 1.5x FSM's 35.30%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
87.32%
Net income growth above 1.5x FSM's 35.33%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
87.33%
EPS growth above 1.5x FSM's 35.09%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
87.33%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x FSM's 35.09%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
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.
-292.20%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-292.20%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-100.00%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while FSM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y CAGR while FSM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-100.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSM stands at 0.00%. 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.
-1164.16%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FSM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1370.88%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSM is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
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.
-7.08%
Negative asset growth while FSM invests at 185.38%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-4.75%
We have a declining book value while FSM shows 5.16%. 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.
110.89%
We expand SG&A while FSM cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.