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.
-5.09%
Negative revenue growth while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-4.91%
Negative gross profit growth while SAND is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
1.34%
EBIT growth below 50% of SAND's 27.66%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
1.34%
Operating income growth under 50% of SAND's 27.66%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-12.16%
Negative net income growth while SAND stands at 31.65%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-13.33%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SAND is at 56.80%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
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%
Negative FCF growth while SAND is at 63.71%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
213.02%
10Y CAGR of 213.02% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
160.78%
5Y CAGR of 160.78% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
25.63%
3Y CAGR of 25.63% 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.
445.64%
Positive OCF/share growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
24.29%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SAND 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%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 50.26%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
15.46%
Below 50% of SAND's 50.26%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
443.23%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 5.86%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
64.29%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 5.86%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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%
Our AR growth while SAND 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.
2.18%
Asset growth above 1.5x SAND's 0.91%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
3.12%
Positive BV/share change while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
270.10%
Debt growth of 270.10% while SAND 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%
We expand SG&A while SAND cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.