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.
13.24%
Revenue growth above 1.5x SAND's 4.38%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
8.19%
Positive gross profit growth while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
7.00%
Positive EBIT growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
7.00%
Positive operating income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
3.04%
Positive net income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
2.86%
Positive EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
2.86%
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.
11.63%
OCF growth at 50-75% of SAND's 19.77%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
-63.01%
Negative FCF growth while SAND is at 42.31%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
60.86%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 175.72%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
54.95%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of SAND's 61.59%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
60.21%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 49.92%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
43.28%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SAND's 378.95%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
82.95%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 70.89%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
82.43%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of SAND's 99.11%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
4.10%
Below 50% of SAND's 69.23%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
254.38%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
134.22%
Below 50% of SAND's 1157.85%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
90.98%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 53.45%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
25.60%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
16.45%
Positive short-term equity growth while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while SAND stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-14.20%
Firm’s AR is declining while SAND shows 9.25%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-31.41%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-0.48%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
1.90%
Positive BV/share change while SAND is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-98.25%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
16.98%
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.