EPS growth field. I suggest changing from the "NM" value, when crossing zero, to "Turnaround/Worsening"

  • updated
  • Under review

Hi SA Team, 

In the Peers screen, seeing the "NM" value in the "EPS Diluted 3 Year (CAGR)" field value can be somewhat misleading. For example, OIBR, a company that is going through a turnaround by selling unprofitable divisions will naturally show negative revenue CAGR that couple with that "NM" in EPS 3Y CAGR, as it changes from negative to positive, misses the most important point. It can also work the other way around so I suggest changing the "NM" value, when crossing zero, to something like "Turnaround" when is upwards or "Worsening" when is downwards.

SA Admin Kushal Mehrotra
  • Under review

Hi polosilvaa,

Thanks for the feedback, I'll relay the same to our product team.

Kushal Mehrotra
Data QA Analyst, Seeking Alpha

Steven Cress


We appreciate your feedback. Unfortunately, without an analyst covering the stock, there is no way we could know if an improving trend is due to a 'Turnaround' or another type of development. There could be a list of financial events or accounting principals that would lead to an increase or decrease in the CAGR rates for stocks with negative earnings. Additionally, while a 3-year or 5-year CAGR can show an improving trend overall, it could also have irregular intermittent annual swings, and it would not be accurate to exhibit 'Turnaround'. Therefore, it is probably best to leave stocks that generate negative earnings as 'NM' in the field value. Fortunately, in the financials page, users can look at the growth rates and get a picture at what is behind the 'NM' field description. Please do not hesitate to come forward with feedback, suggestions, or questions in the future. Thank you for your time and recommendation.