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.
-2.56%
Negative revenue growth while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
4.22%
Gross profit growth of 4.22% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal improvements could expand further.
-7.57%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-7.57%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
12.24%
Positive net income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
18.18%
Positive EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
10.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
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.
-3.85%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-3.85%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
184.72%
10Y CAGR of 184.72% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
151.42%
5Y CAGR of 151.42% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
127.75%
3Y CAGR of 127.75% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
28313.94%
OCF/share CAGR of 28313.94% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
380.54%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 380.54% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2594.52%
Net income/share CAGR of 2594.52% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
303.15%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 303.15% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1208.81%
Equity/share CAGR of 1208.81% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
281.49%
Equity/share CAGR of 281.49% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
43.63%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SAND's 158.39%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.23%
Negative asset growth while SAND invests at 508.91%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
4.09%
Under 50% of SAND's 493.40%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
-7.99%
We’re deleveraging while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
78.22%
SG&A declining or stable vs. SAND's 506.54%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.