I have a wrong concept stuck in my mind recently.

I thought that I would rate a stock with EPS Growth better than another stock without EPS Growth.

But somehow it doesn't make sense.
A lot of good stocks that I know are rated lower because of this concept.

Then, while looking at Berjaya Sports Toto's datasheet, I realize that I make a big mistake.

Some ultra stocks don't have EPS Growth because they have been distributing all their earning as dividend.

Let's take an example of a company with consistent 20% Return on Asset.
If they distribute every of their earning annually, they will not have asset growth, and thus they will remain their same 20% ROA every year and also their Eps (if equity doesn't change)

So it's wrong to rate a company without looking at the dividend payout.

Lesson learnt.