PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
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.
4.05%
Revenue growth under 50% of FSM's 26.55%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
4.81%
Gross profit growth under 50% of FSM's 58.92%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
3.70%
EBIT growth below 50% of FSM's 272.62%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
3.70%
Operating income growth under 50% of FSM's 272.62%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
1.68%
Net income growth under 50% of FSM's 733.11%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
2.44%
EPS growth under 50% of FSM's 648.78%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share 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.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while FSM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
0.08%
Positive OCF growth while FSM is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
0.03%
FCF growth under 50% of FSM's 57.95%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
723.13%
10Y CAGR of 723.13% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
182.60%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 322.06%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
306.23%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FSM's 219.35%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
640.28%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with FSM's 669.19%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
242.27%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x FSM's 35.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
441.69%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of FSM's 575.87%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
581.35%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FSM's 493.95%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
268.71%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 477.42%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
644.65%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of FSM's 843.18%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
3089.26%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FSM's 800.30%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
147.25%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FSM's 79.57%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
86.70%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FSM's 78.64%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
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.
59.82%
AR growth well above FSM's 30.20%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.65%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x FSM's 3.39%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
4.10%
Positive BV/share change while FSM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-9.08%
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.
28.17%
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.