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.
-5.09%
Negative revenue growth while RGLD stands at 0.87%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-4.91%
Negative gross profit growth while RGLD is at 9.50%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
1.34%
Positive EBIT growth while RGLD is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
1.34%
Positive operating income growth while RGLD is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-12.16%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-13.33%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-18.85%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-17.03%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
213.02%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of RGLD's 474.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
160.78%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to RGLD's 177.41%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
25.63%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of RGLD's 67.13%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
445.64%
Positive OCF/share growth while RGLD is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
24.29%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while RGLD is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
320.17%
Positive 5Y CAGR while RGLD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
15.46%
Positive short-term CAGR while RGLD is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
443.23%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with RGLD's 481.94%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
64.29%
Below 50% of RGLD's 212.17%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
9.90%
AR growth well above RGLD's 1.05%. 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.
2.18%
Asset growth well under 50% of RGLD's 97.27%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
3.12%
Under 50% of RGLD's 34.23%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
270.10%
Debt growth of 270.10% while RGLD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
64.61%
SG&A growth well above RGLD's 15.88%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.