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.
-17.85%
Negative revenue growth while SAND stands at 26.05%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-10.34%
Negative gross profit growth while SAND is at 46.81%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-14.45%
Negative EBIT growth while SAND is at 155.81%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-14.45%
Negative operating income growth while SAND is at 155.81%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
149.47%
Positive net income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
148.39%
Positive EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
148.39%
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.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
-24.07%
Negative OCF growth while SAND is at 13.79%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-23.82%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
105.28%
10Y CAGR of 105.28% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
-22.48%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
27.89%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
91.05%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 490.79%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
-39.41%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
17.79%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
23.01%
Below 50% of SAND's 107.04%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-59.13%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SAND is 101.52%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
15.47%
Positive short-term CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
205.07%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 125.07%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
22.24%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
-6.81%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
-61.08%
Firm’s AR is declining while SAND shows 5.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.80%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
0.53%
Positive BV/share change while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-13.90%
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.
11.86%
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.