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.
9.24%
Revenue growth similar to FSLR's 10.12%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
-19.88%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
5.51%
Positive EBIT growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
5.24%
Positive operating income growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
18.05%
Positive net income growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
17.74%
Positive EPS growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
17.74%
Positive diluted EPS growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.64%
Share count expansion well above FSLR's 0.43%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.64%
Diluted share count expanding well above FSLR's 1.10%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.87%
Positive OCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
15.59%
Positive FCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
256.51%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 1690.51%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-49.79%
Negative 5Y CAGR while FSLR stands at 47.74%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-36.12%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSLR stands at 56.77%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-3127.52%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-100.46%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR is at 68.77%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-297.16%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-702.91%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while FSLR is at 620.04%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
66.53%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-413.33%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
30.14%
Equity/share CAGR of 30.14% while FSLR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-38.31%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 32.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
18.92%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of FSLR's 21.78%. 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.
-1.03%
Firm’s AR is declining while FSLR shows 24.22%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
20.97%
We show growth while FSLR is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
7.58%
Positive asset growth while FSLR is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-3.73%
We have a declining book value while FSLR shows 0.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
21.02%
We have some new debt while FSLR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-3.96%
Our R&D shrinks while FSLR invests at 9.09%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-13.40%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.