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.
8.51%
Revenue growth under 50% of FSLR's 23.65%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
24.75%
Gross profit growth similar to FSLR's 25.05%. Walter Schloss would assume both firms track common industry trends.
89.86%
EBIT growth 50-75% of FSLR's 130.88%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
93.76%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of FSLR's 130.88%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
191.18%
Net income growth above 1.5x FSLR's 71.63%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
194.44%
EPS growth above 1.5x FSLR's 69.70%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
180.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x FSLR's 71.88%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.60%
Share count expansion well above FSLR's 0.12%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
6.01%
Diluted share count expanding well above FSLR's 0.56%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
53.52%
Positive OCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
351.94%
Positive FCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
78.80%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 12089.73%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
121.98%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FSLR's 86.35%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
21.07%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 43.50%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
108.12%
OCF/share CAGR of 108.12% while FSLR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
165.11%
Positive OCF/share growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
122.81%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
125.74%
Below 50% of FSLR's 1258.68%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
552.49%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
2520.61%
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.
-29.92%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 122.81%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-44.44%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 11.32%. 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.
-46.16%
Firm’s AR is declining while FSLR shows 16.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-4.56%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.86%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
2.55%
Similar to FSLR's 2.77%. Walter Schloss finds parallel capital usage or profit distribution strategies.
0.36%
We have some new debt while FSLR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-1.33%
Our R&D shrinks while FSLR invests at 0.92%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-2.89%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.