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.
-10.16%
Negative revenue growth while NEM stands at 0.06%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-18.53%
Negative gross profit growth while NEM is at 4.18%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-18.53%
Negative EBIT growth while NEM is at 1.90%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-18.53%
Negative operating income growth while NEM is at 1.90%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-20.45%
Negative net income growth while NEM stands at 80.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-18.18%
Negative EPS growth while NEM is at 80.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-18.18%
Negative diluted EPS growth while NEM is at 80.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.07%
Share reduction more than 1.5x NEM's 0.20%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.04%
Diluted share change of 0.04% while NEM is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-10.70%
Negative OCF growth while NEM is at 108.33%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
1085.59%
FCF growth above 1.5x NEM's 320.00%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
198.96%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 8.19%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
-24.65%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
2800.51%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 45.47%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
222.96%
Positive OCF/share growth while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-39.82%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
1699.31%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 350.90% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
186.89%
Positive 5Y CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-57.64%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
5331.89%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 26.52%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
123.30%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 8.46%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
41.24%
Positive short-term equity growth while NEM is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
317.42%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while NEM cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
57.80%
Our AR growth while NEM is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.00%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x NEM's 0.72%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
1.92%
1.25-1.5x NEM's 1.43%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
0.02%
Debt shrinking faster vs. NEM's 0.35%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.79%
SG&A declining or stable vs. NEM's 6.67%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.