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.
13.98%
Revenue growth under 50% of FSLR's 143.49%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
79.15%
Gross profit growth under 50% of FSLR's 159.84%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
237.35%
EBIT growth 50-75% of FSLR's 431.78%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
257.73%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of FSLR's 431.78%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
453.98%
Net income growth comparable to FSLR's 480.50%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
456.25%
EPS growth similar to FSLR's 421.05%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
386.67%
Similar diluted EPS growth to FSLR's 424.32%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.31%
Share reduction more than 1.5x FSLR's 10.67%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
14.89%
Diluted share count expanding well above FSLR's 10.13%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
143.62%
OCF growth above 1.5x FSLR's 68.68%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
104.87%
FCF growth 75-90% of FSLR's 122.76%. Bill Ackman might push for improved capital allocation or operational changes to match the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.46%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 195.71%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-5.72%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSLR stands at 36.69%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-87.00%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR is at 122.54%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
178.97%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x FSLR's 30.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
191.28%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x FSLR's 60.07%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
325.66%
Positive short-term CAGR while FSLR 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.
-28.22%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 159.94%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-40.33%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 15.36%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
-13.38%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
22.49%
We show growth while FSLR is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
2.33%
Positive asset growth while FSLR is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
12.82%
Positive BV/share change while FSLR is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
1.67%
We have some new debt while FSLR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
14.33%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. FSLR's 12.98%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
1.92%
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.