PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
0.00 - 0.01
0.00 - 0.02
289 / 496.9K (Avg.)
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.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.00%
Negative net income growth while PLUG stands at 45.31%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.25%
Share reduction more than 1.5x PLUG's 4.76%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.00%
OCF growth under 50% of PLUG's 66.29%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
0.00%
FCF growth under 50% of PLUG's 56.82%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-29.23%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
220.47%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PLUG's 127.97%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
106.00%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to PLUG's 117.59%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
-243.98%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while PLUG stands at 91.96%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-423.72%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while PLUG is at 23.43%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-668.95%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
206.95%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PLUG's 89.89% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
499.00%
Positive 5Y CAGR while PLUG is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
60.24%
Positive short-term CAGR while PLUG is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1826.40%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while PLUG is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
116.90%
Positive short-term equity growth while PLUG is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
7.95%
Our AR growth while PLUG is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.25%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment 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.