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.
-7.03%
Negative revenue growth while SAND stands at 22.40%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
5.03%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x SAND's 3.87%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
5.03%
Positive EBIT growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
5.03%
Positive operating income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-5.02%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-7.14%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-7.14%
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.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-5.30%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-962.45%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
265.57%
10Y CAGR of 265.57% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
40.18%
5Y CAGR of 40.18% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
-37.68%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
679.42%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 541.98%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
42.85%
Below 50% of SAND's 497.07%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-48.13%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
329.48%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 124.38% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
2.22%
Below 50% of SAND's 149.02%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-67.99%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
1148.91%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 128.62%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
129.90%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 115.97%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
52.76%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 45.32%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
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.
-28.08%
Firm’s AR is declining while SAND shows 51.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
13.35%
Positive asset growth while SAND is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
22.01%
Positive BV/share change while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-19.88%
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.
-3.79%
We cut SG&A while SAND invests at 40.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.