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.
-2.68%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
0.85%
Gross profit growth under 50% of FSM's 84.58%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-6.90%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-6.90%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
11.50%
Positive net income growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
14.29%
Positive EPS growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
14.29%
Positive diluted EPS growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.19%
Share reduction more than 1.5x FSM's 6.77%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.26%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x FSM's 6.77%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-14.53%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-14.16%
Negative FCF growth while FSM is at 36.33%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
99.48%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to FSM's 96.51%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
35.84%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
22.28%
Positive 3Y CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
73.19%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while FSM is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
25.11%
Positive OCF/share growth while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
19.89%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
51.85%
Positive 10Y CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
77.41%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
54.11%
Positive short-term CAGR while FSM is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
123.94%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 190.37%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
9.22%
Below 50% of FSM's 87.46%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
6.03%
Below 50% of FSM's 24.45%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
117.08%
Dividend/share CAGR of 117.08% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
56.86%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 56.86% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
94433.33%
AR growth well above FSM's 13.30%. 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.
0.94%
Asset growth above 1.5x FSM's 0.17%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
3.22%
1.25-1.5x FSM's 2.74%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
-10.44%
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.
76.81%
SG&A declining or stable vs. FSM's 186.79%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.