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.
31.20%
Positive revenue growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-78.20%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-1010.38%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-7584.19%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-6871.81%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-6763.64%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-6763.64%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
1.25%
Share count expansion well above FSLR's 0.98%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
1.25%
Diluted share count expanding well above FSLR's 0.08%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
39.38%
Positive OCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
41.08%
Positive FCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
551.36%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 7800.16%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
610.09%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSLR's 1111.96%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
25.83%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 84.95%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-200.41%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-1610.30%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-387.08%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-320.95%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while FSLR is at 831.01%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-1901.08%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while FSLR is 2915.02%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-485.94%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
110.96%
Equity/share CAGR of 110.96% while FSLR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
25.32%
Below 50% of FSLR's 172.90%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
58.28%
AR growth well above FSLR's 62.25%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-15.35%
Inventory is declining while FSLR stands at 19.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-3.92%
Negative asset growth while FSLR invests at 11.39%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-9.42%
We have a declining book value while FSLR shows 2.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-4.16%
We’re deleveraging while FSLR stands at 173.98%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
11.79%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. FSLR's 5.59%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
33.38%
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.