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.
4.05%
Revenue growth under 50% of SAND's 21.02%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
4.81%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SAND's 10.82%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
3.70%
EBIT growth below 50% of SAND's 13.93%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
3.70%
Operating income growth under 50% of SAND's 13.93%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
1.68%
Positive net income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2.44%
Positive EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
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.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
0.08%
OCF growth under 50% of SAND's 18.10%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
0.03%
FCF growth under 50% of SAND's 18.57%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
723.13%
10Y CAGR of 723.13% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
182.60%
5Y CAGR of 182.60% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
306.23%
3Y CAGR of 306.23% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
640.28%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 966.99%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
242.27%
Below 50% of SAND's 966.99%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
441.69%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 644.54%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
581.35%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 324.39% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
268.71%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of SAND's 324.39%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
644.65%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 325.60%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
3089.26%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 57.32%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
147.25%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 57.32%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
86.70%
Below 50% of SAND's 963.69%. 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.
59.82%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SAND's 153.85%, 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.
4.65%
Asset growth at 50-75% of SAND's 9.23%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
4.10%
50-75% of SAND's 6.35%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-9.08%
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.
28.17%
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.