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.
-27.76%
Negative revenue growth while KGC stands at 4.26%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-37.06%
Negative gross profit growth while KGC is at 8.36%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-31.50%
Negative EBIT growth while KGC is at 73.91%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-31.50%
Negative operating income growth while KGC is at 73.91%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
31.79%
Net income growth under 50% of KGC's 261.04%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
30.30%
EPS growth under 50% of KGC's 260.97%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
30.30%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of KGC's 259.35%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.05%
Share count expansion well above KGC's 0.05%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.01%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x KGC's 1.04%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-52.12%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
-25.13%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-43.96%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
6.31%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while KGC is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
5.48%
Positive 5Y CAGR while KGC is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-3.20%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-5.92%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
17.09%
Positive OCF/share growth while KGC is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
7.38%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while KGC is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
28.59%
Positive 10Y CAGR while KGC is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
188.77%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x KGC's 3.60%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
155.80%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x KGC's 2.71%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
72.43%
Positive growth while KGC is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
26.47%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of KGC's 35.30%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
24.52%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to KGC's 24.92%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
24.20%
Stable or rising dividend while KGC is cutting. John Neff sees a strong advantage in consistent shareholder returns vs. a struggling peer.
49.75%
Dividend/share CAGR of 49.75% while KGC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
70.16%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 70.16% while KGC is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-31.31%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-5.56%
Inventory is declining while KGC stands at 3.63%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.15%
Positive asset growth while KGC is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
2.00%
Positive BV/share change while KGC is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-11.95%
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.
-23.88%
We cut SG&A while KGC invests at 34.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.