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.
-15.79%
Negative revenue growth while FSM stands at 53.44%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-16.44%
Negative gross profit growth while FSM is at 106.73%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-17.01%
Negative EBIT growth while FSM is at 487.61%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-17.01%
Negative operating income growth while FSM is at 487.61%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-17.73%
Negative net income growth while FSM stands at 775.55%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-21.88%
Negative EPS growth while FSM is at 750.46%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-21.88%
Negative diluted EPS growth while FSM is at 743.12%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.02%
Share reduction more than 1.5x FSM's 0.63%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.01%
Reduced diluted shares while FSM is at 0.60%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
-50.24%
Dividend reduction while FSM stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-15.45%
Negative OCF growth while FSM is at 140.71%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-32.66%
Negative FCF growth while FSM is at 398.49%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
5.30%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSM's 245.54%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
17.64%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSM's 122.85%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-28.00%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSM stands at 83.22%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
13.22%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FSM's 951.61%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
54.57%
Below 50% of FSM's 165.39%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-25.62%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FSM stands at 47.30%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
18.59%
Below 50% of FSM's 4567.18%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
235.00%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x FSM's 119.00%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
-23.01%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSM is 31.98%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
61.85%
10Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSM's 117.86%. Martin Whitman would note a lag in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
29.21%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FSM's 21.47%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
22.22%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FSM's 18.68%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
46.20%
Dividend/share CAGR of 46.20% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
91.79%
Dividend/share CAGR of 91.79% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
76.29%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 76.29% while FSM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
57.36%
AR growth well above FSM's 23.05%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-50.99%
Inventory is declining while FSM stands at 26.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
0.02%
Asset growth well under 50% of FSM's 2.77%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.06%
We have a declining book value while FSM shows 5.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-4.44%
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.
-11.84%
We cut SG&A while FSM invests at 0.30%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.