PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.52 - 1.58
1.19 - 3.37
354.5K / 984.1K (Avg.)
-1.64 | -0.94
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.
22.07%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x FSLR's 15.35%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
-8.12%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-285.53%
Negative EBIT growth while FSLR is at 20.33%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-437.48%
Negative operating income growth while FSLR is at 20.33%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-531.05%
Negative net income growth while FSLR stands at 783.41%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-455.50%
Negative EPS growth while FSLR is at 771.43%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-455.50%
Negative diluted EPS growth while FSLR is at 728.57%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
1.89%
Share count expansion well above FSLR's 0.34%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-5.06%
Reduced diluted shares while FSLR is at 0.92%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
152.45%
Positive OCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
35.56%
Positive FCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
148.43%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 1259.10%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
148.43%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 1259.10%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
148.43%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 1259.10%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-93.69%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-93.69%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-93.69%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
80.22%
Below 50% of FSLR's 730.35%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
80.22%
Below 50% of FSLR's 730.35%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
80.22%
Below 50% of FSLR's 730.35%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
21.25%
AR growth well above FSLR's 10.99%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
37.61%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. FSLR's 78.71%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
3.15%
Asset growth well under 50% of FSLR's 16.88%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
0.15%
Under 50% of FSLR's 25.49%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-3.92%
Our R&D shrinks while FSLR invests at 23.05%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
16.71%
We expand SG&A while FSLR cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.