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.
3.09%
Revenue growth under 50% of SAND's 8.06%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
6.25%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SAND's 15.07%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
4.11%
Positive EBIT growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
4.11%
Positive operating income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
26.42%
Positive net income growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
25.93%
Positive EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
25.93%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.05%
Slight or no buybacks while SAND is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.04%
Diluted share count expanding well above SAND's 0.03%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
-49.72%
Both companies cut dividends. Martin Whitman would look for a common factor, such as cyclical downturn or liquidity constraints.
8.76%
OCF growth at 50-75% of SAND's 17.44%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing sales effectively.
20.73%
FCF growth 75-90% of SAND's 26.16%. Bill Ackman might push for improved capital allocation or operational changes to match the competitor.
46.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 13.58%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
35.78%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 3.19%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
13.77%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 6.02%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
66.91%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 29.09%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
76.04%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 35.79%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
25.43%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SAND's 18.85%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
2617.04%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 2.82% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
100.51%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
13.76%
Positive short-term CAGR while SAND is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
59.30%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SAND's 30.72%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
37.47%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 50-75% of SAND's 54.48%. Martin Whitman would question a shortfall in capital accumulation vs. the competitor.
20.03%
Below 50% of SAND's 51.94%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
208.45%
Dividend/share CAGR of 208.45% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
111.38%
Dividend/share CAGR of 111.38% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
21.38%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 21.38% while SAND is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
35.90%
AR growth well above SAND's 50.66%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
100.00%
We show growth while SAND is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
1.90%
Positive asset growth while SAND is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.34%
BV/share growth above 1.5x SAND's 0.18%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-1.26%
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.
15.27%
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.