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.
-1.41%
Negative revenue growth while NEM stands at 1.16%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-9.76%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-6.19%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-6.19%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-5.33%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-5.71%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-5.71%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.14%
Share count expansion well above NEM's 0.13%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.09%
Diluted share count expanding well above NEM's 0.13%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.99%
Negative OCF growth while NEM is at 50.29%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
15.97%
FCF growth under 50% of NEM's 103.89%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
17.83%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while NEM is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
48.43%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 9.48%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
57.84%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 30.71%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-6.51%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while NEM stands at 87.77%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
61.94%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 33.11%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
86.47%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of NEM's 236.53%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-17.41%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
115.73%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 48.45%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
218.03%
Below 50% of NEM's 1593.41%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
76.72%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 3.64%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
24.80%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of NEM's 31.58%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
23.93%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x NEM's 6.78%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
44.13%
10Y dividend/share CAGR at 75-90% of NEM's 56.89%. Bill Ackman might push for a stronger payout policy to match the competitor’s returns.
119.91%
Below 50% of NEM's 986.49%. Michael Burry worries the firm returns far less capital to shareholders over 5 years.
82.04%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while NEM cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
-46.31%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
61.49%
We show growth while NEM is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-0.33%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.92%
Positive BV/share change while NEM is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-9.45%
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.
-44.46%
We cut SG&A while NEM invests at 14.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.