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.
-1.54%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-67.59%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-154.70%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-167.27%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-126.58%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-129.27%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-126.83%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.48%
Share reduction while FSLR is at 0.49%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.13%
Slight or no buyback while FSLR is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-185.68%
Negative OCF growth while FSLR is at 152.82%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-120.29%
Negative FCF growth while FSLR is at 207.34%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
118.93%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 3242.41%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-71.86%
Negative 5Y CAGR while FSLR stands at 29.37%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-51.76%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-59829.12%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-185.54%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-283.83%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-3321.62%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while FSLR is at 1197.54%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-159.04%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
22.92%
Positive short-term CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-3.86%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while FSLR stands at 20257.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-38.42%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 34.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
27.56%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of FSLR's 32.16%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
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.
-2.29%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
9.37%
Inventory growth well above FSLR's 6.98%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
10.53%
Asset growth above 1.5x FSLR's 3.62%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-5.07%
We have a declining book value while FSLR shows 1.86%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
55.83%
Debt growth far above FSLR's 1.38%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
29.59%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. FSLR's 23.96%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
30.25%
SG&A growth well above FSLR's 17.07%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.